std::experimental::ranges::equal
<experimental/ranges/algorithm>
class Pred = ranges::equal_to <>,
class Proj1 = ranges::identity, class Proj2 = ranges::identity >
requires IndirectlyComparable<I1, I2, Pred, Proj1, Proj2>
bool equal( I1 first1, S1 last1, I2 first2, S2 last2, Pred pred = Pred{},
class Proj1 = ranges::identity, class Proj2 = ranges::identity >
requires IndirectlyComparable<ranges::iterator_t <R1>, ranges::iterator_t <R2>,
Pred, Proj1, Proj2>
bool equal( R1&& r1, R2&& r2, Pred pred = Pred{},
class Pred = ranges::equal_to <>,
class Proj1 = ranges::identity, class Proj2 = ranges::identity >
requires InputIterator<std::decay_t <I2>> && !Range<I2> &&
IndirectlyComparable<I1, std::decay_t <I2>, Pred, Proj1, Proj2>
bool equal( I1 first1, S1 last1, I2&& first2_, Pred pred = Pred{},
(deprecated)
class Proj1 = ranges::identity, class Proj2 = ranges::identity >
requires InputIterator<std::decay_t <I2>> && !Range<I2> &&
IndirectlyComparable<ranges::iterator_t <R1>, std::decay_t <I2>, Pred, Proj1, Proj2>
bool equal( R1&& r1, I2&& first2_, Pred pred = Pred{},
(deprecated)
[
first1,
last1)
is equal to the range [
first2,
last2)
, and false otherwise. Two ranges are considered equal if they have the same number of elements and, for every iterator i
in the range [
first1,
last1)
, ranges::invoke (pred, ranges::invoke (proj1, *i), ranges::invoke (proj2, *(first2 + (i - first1)))) is true.
Notwithstanding the declarations depicted above, the actual number and order of template parameters for algorithm declarations is unspecified. Thus, if explicit template arguments are used when calling an algorithm, the program is probably non-portable.
Contents
[edit] Parameters
[edit] Return value
true if the two ranges are equal, otherwise returns false.
[edit] Notes
ranges::equal
should not be used to compare the ranges formed by the iterators from std::unordered_set , std::unordered_multiset , std::unordered_map , or std::unordered_multimap because the order in which the elements are stored in those containers may be different even if the two containers store the same elements.
When comparing entire containers for equality, operator==
for the corresponding container are usually preferred.
[edit] Complexity
[edit] Possible implementation
namespace detail { template<InputIterator I1, SizedSentinel<I1> S1, InputIterator I2, SizedSentinel<I1> S2> bool check_size(I1& first1, S1& last1, I2& first2, S2& last2) { return last1 - first1 != last2 - first2; } template<InputIterator I1, Sentinel<I1> S1, InputIterator I2, Sentinel<I1> S2> bool check_size(I1& first1, S1& last1, I2& first2, S2& last2) { return false; } } template<InputIterator I1, Sentinel<I1> S1, InputIterator I2, Sentinel<I2> S2, class Pred = ranges::equal_to <>, class Proj1 = ranges::identity, class Proj2 = ranges::identity > requires IndirectlyComparable<I1, I2, Pred, Proj1, Proj2> bool equal(I1 first1, S1 last1, I2 first2, S2 last2, Pred pred = Pred{}, Proj1 proj1 = Proj1{}, Proj2 proj2 = Proj2{}) { if (detail::check_size(first1, last1, first2, last2)) return false; for (; first1 != last1 && first2 != last2; (void) ++first1, (void)++first2) if (!ranges::invoke (pred, ranges::invoke (proj1, *first1), ranges::invoke (proj2, *first2))) return false; return first1 == last1 && first2 == last2; }
[edit] Example
Reason: no example