Received a message that this code failed ..... Not sure where the problem is ....
#define _AMD64_
#include <Windows.h>
#include <map>
template <typename K, typename V>
class interval_map {
friend void IntervalMapTest();
V m_valBegin; // default constructor, whtever it is
std::map<K, V> m_map;
public:
// constructor associates whole range of K with val
interval_map( V const& val )
: m_valBegin( val ) {}
// Assign value val to interval [keyBegin, keyEnd).
// Overwrite previous values in this interval.
// Conforming to the C++ Standard Library conventions, the interval
// includes keyBegin, but excludes keyEnd.
// If !( keyBegin < keyEnd ), this designates an empty interval,
// and assign must do nothing.
void assign( K const& keyBegin, K const& keyEnd, V const& val ) {
// ATTENTION: *** Not sure if should be a return or a throw. It is not clear how error should be treated.
// This code can be much better
// Key type K. besides being copyable and assignable, is less - than comparable via operator<, and does not implement any other operations, in particular no equality comparison or arithmetic operators.
if ( !( keyBegin < keyEnd ) ) {
return;
}
// An empty map...just add it
if ( m_map.empty() ) {
// if V is the same as initial, do not add anything. Depending on V type, this can lead to extra execution time
// Value type V. besides being copyable and assignable, is equality - comparable via operator==, and does not implement any other operations.
if ( !( val == m_valBegin ) ) {
m_map.insert( std::make_pair( keyBegin, val ) );
}
} else { // there is at least one entry
// Remove all entries between Begin and End (exlcusive)
auto it = m_map.lower_bound( keyBegin ); // Returns an iterator pointing to the first element that is not less than (i.e. greater or equal to) key
while ( ( it != m_map.end() ) && ( it->first < keyEnd ) ) {
it = m_map.erase( it );
}
// Insert new K
m_map.insert( std::make_pair( keyBegin, val ) ); // the new pair..Maybe add a test for success?
it = m_map.lower_bound( keyBegin ); // iterator to new element. Assuming the insert worked ;)
auto it_next = it; // previous item (it is the current item. it has to exist, assuming the insert worked ;) )
it_next++;
if ( ( it_next != m_map.end() ) && ( it->second == it_next->second ) ) { // if next entry has same V, exclude it
m_map.erase( it_next ); // remove next key, preserving this new entry
} else if ( it != m_map.begin() ) {
auto it_prev = it; // next item (it is the current item. it has to exist, assuming the insert worked ;) )
it_prev--;
if ( it_prev->second == it->second ) { // if previous entry has same V, exclude it
m_map.erase( it ); // remove this entry, preserving previous key....this can be an issue with ctor/dtor....
}
}
if ( !m_map.empty() ) { // it should not be empty, but....
// If first entry has same default value, remove first entry
if ( m_map.begin()->second == m_valBegin ) {
m_map.erase( m_map.begin() ); // this can result on an empty map
}
}
}
}
// look-up of the value associated with key
V const& operator[]( K const& key ) const {
auto it = m_map.upper_bound( key );
if ( it == m_map.begin() ) {
return m_valBegin;
} else {
return ( --it )->second;
}
}
};
// Many solutions we receive are incorrect. Consider using a randomized test
// to discover the cases that your implementation does not handle correctly.
// We recommend to implement a test function that tests the functionality of
// the interval_map, for example using a map of int intervals to char.
void IntervalMapTest() {
interval_map<int, char> M( 'A' );
}
main() {
}
Comments
Post a Comment