Java Array, Finding Duplicates

Question

I have an array, and am looking for duplicates.

duplicates = false;
for(j = 0; j < zipcodeList.length; j++){
    for(k = 0; k < zipcodeList.length; k++         


        

Answer 1

On the nose answer..

duplicates=false;
for (j=0;j

Edited to switch .equals() back to == since I read somewhere you're using int, which wasn't clear in the initial question. Also to set k=j+1, to halve execution time, but it's still O(n²).

A faster (in the limit) way

Here's a hash based approach. You gotta pay for the autoboxing, but it's O(n) instead of O(n²). An enterprising soul would go find a primitive int-based hash set (Apache or Google Collections has such a thing, methinks.)

boolean duplicates(final int[] zipcodelist)
{
  Set lump = new HashSet();
  for (int i : zipcodelist)
  {
    if (lump.contains(i)) return true;
    lump.add(i);
  }
  return false;
}

Bow to HuyLe

See HuyLe's answer for a more or less O(n) solution, which I think needs a couple of add'l steps:

static boolean duplicates(final int[] zipcodelist)
{
   final int MAXZIP = 99999;
   boolean[] bitmap = new boolean[MAXZIP+1];
   java.util.Arrays.fill(bitmap, false);
   for (int item : zipcodeList)
     if (!bitmap[item]) bitmap[item] = true;
     else return true;
   }
   return false;
}

Or Just to be Compact

static boolean duplicates(final int[] zipcodelist)
{
   final int MAXZIP = 99999;
   boolean[] bitmap = new boolean[MAXZIP+1];  // Java guarantees init to false
   for (int item : zipcodeList)
     if (!(bitmap[item] ^= true)) return true;
   return false;
}

Does it Matter?

Well, so I ran a little benchmark, which is iffy all over the place, but here's the code:

import java.util.BitSet;

class Yuk
{
  static boolean duplicatesZero(final int[] zipcodelist)
  {
    boolean duplicates=false;
    for (int j=0;j

With NSQUARED:

Trial for size= 10
Size=10, avg time = 0.0ms
Trial for size= 1000
Size=1000, avg time = 0.0ms
Trial for size= 10000
Size=10000, avg time = 100.0ms
Trial for size= 100000
Size=100000, avg time = 9923.3ms

With HashSet

Trial for zipcodelist size= 10
Size=10, avg time = 0.16ms
Trial for zipcodelist size= 1000
Size=1000, avg time = 0.15ms
Trial for zipcodelist size= 10000
Size=10000, avg time = 0.0ms
Trial for zipcodelist size= 100000
Size=100000, avg time = 0.16ms
Trial for zipcodelist size= 1000000
Size=1000000, avg time = 0.0ms

With BitSet

Trial for zipcodelist size= 10
Size=10, avg time = 0.0ms
Trial for zipcodelist size= 1000
Size=1000, avg time = 0.0ms
Trial for zipcodelist size= 10000
Size=10000, avg time = 0.0ms
Trial for zipcodelist size= 100000
Size=100000, avg time = 0.0ms
Trial for zipcodelist size= 1000000
Size=1000000, avg time = 0.0ms

BITSET Wins!

But only by a hair... .15ms is within the error for currentTimeMillis(), and there are some gaping holes in my benchmark. Note that for any list longer than 100000, you can simply return true because there will be a duplicate. In fact, if the list is anything like random, you can return true WHP for a much shorter list. What's the moral? In the limit, the most efficient implementation is:

 return true;

And you won't be wrong very often.