I have found a couple of ways to update a key in the priority queue when I searched online. I am just wondering what way of implementation do you prefer using existing C++ STL data structures?
№ | Пользователь | Рейтинг |
---|---|---|
1 | tourist | 3993 |
2 | jiangly | 3743 |
3 | orzdevinwang | 3707 |
4 | Radewoosh | 3627 |
5 | jqdai0815 | 3620 |
6 | Benq | 3564 |
7 | Kevin114514 | 3443 |
8 | ksun48 | 3434 |
9 | Rewinding | 3397 |
10 | Um_nik | 3396 |
Страны | Города | Организации | Всё → |
№ | Пользователь | Вклад |
---|---|---|
1 | cry | 167 |
2 | Um_nik | 163 |
3 | maomao90 | 162 |
3 | atcoder_official | 162 |
5 | adamant | 159 |
6 | -is-this-fft- | 158 |
7 | awoo | 155 |
8 | TheScrasse | 154 |
9 | Dominater069 | 153 |
10 | nor | 152 |
I have found a couple of ways to update a key in the priority queue when I searched online. I am just wondering what way of implementation do you prefer using existing C++ STL data structures?
Название |
---|
Just use set instead of a priority queue. It has the same functionality (keys are in sorted order), you can get first key by using *myset.begin(). And if you want to update some key called "key", then you just erase the key using, myset.erase(myset.find(key)), then add the updated version of the key — called "updated_key" — by using, myset.insert(updated_key). This is what I use when i implement dijkstra's algorithm.
Also note, that they "erase", and "find" operations in a set are O(logn), while getting the beginning iterator, "myset.begin()) is only O(1). So this is quite an efficient solution.
This looks good, thanks.
I think you are going to make the same mistake of using set instead of multiset.
Haha I see you read my blog! You are right i just made the same mistake. Thanks for pointing it out!
you can also use
__gnu_pbds::priority_queue
: it hasmodify(iterator, value)