I am wondering why for creating a min heap using the priority_queue
, the std::greater
should be used?
std::priority_queue
The C++ heap functions make_heap
, push_heap
, and pop_heap
operate on a max heap, meaning the top element is the maximum when using the default comparator. So, to create a min-heap, you need to use greater<T>
instead of less<T>
.
I suspect that a max heap is used instead of a min heap is that it is easier to implement with the less
operation. In C++, less
has the special privilege of being the sort of "default" comparator for all STL algorithms; if you only are going to implement one comparison operation (other than ==
), it should be <
. This leads to the unfortunate quirk that priority_queue<T, C<T>, less<T>>
means a max-queue and priority_queue<T, C<T>, greater<T>>
means a min-queue.
Also, certain algorithms like nth_element
need a max-heap.
The logical argument is as follows
std::priority_queue
is a container adaptor; basic memory considerations make the back the preferred place for modifications (with pop_back()
and push_back()
) for sequence containers such as std::vector
. priority_queue
primitives are based on std::make_heap
(constructor), std::pop_heap
+ container::pop_back
(priority_queue::pop
) and on container::push_back
+ std::push_heap
(priority_queue::push
)pop_heap
will take the front of the underlying storage, and put it at the back, restoring the heap invariant afterwards. The reverse goes for push_heap
.sort_heap
on a max_heap
(with the max at the front initially) will repeatedly pop the front to the back and sort the range according to less
(which is the default comparison operator)max_heap
is to have the max element w.r.t. less
at the front, accessed through priority_queue::top
(underlying container::front
). priority_queue
with a std::less
comparator is representing a max_heap
. It could have been defined as a min_heap
by reversing the comparator's arguments (but see the comment by @T.C. that with C++98 binders this is rather verbose) everywhere in the calls to the various heap functions. The one (for me) counter-intuitive result would have been that top()
would then not have given the element with top prioritySee http://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/container/priority_queue. A priority_queue
is designed to put the largest value at the top. This happens if you use the default std::less
comparator. So if you want the reverse behavior, you need to use the reverse comparator, std::greater
.