I’ll just echo Neil Butterworth’s answer, and point out some trouble with your first idea:
You suggested,
Iterate through the array for, say, 100 times and exchange a random index with another random index
Make this rigorous. I'll assume the existence of randn(int n)
, a wrapper around some RNG, producing numbers evenly distributed in [0, n-1], and swap(int a[], size_t i, size_t j)
,
void swap(int a[], size_t i, size_t j) {
int temp = a[i]; a[i] = a[j]; a[j] = temp;
}
which swaps a[i]
and a[j]
.
Now let’s implement your suggestion:
void silly_shuffle(size_t n, int a[n]) {
for (size_t i = 0; i < n; i++)
swap(a, randn(n), randn(n)); // swap two random elements
}
Notice that this is not any better than this simpler (but still wrong) version:
void bad_shuffle(size_t n, int a[n]) {
for (size_t i = 0; i < n; i++)
swap(a, i, randn(n));
}
Well, what’s wrong? Consider how many permutations these functions give you: With n (or 2×_n_ for silly_shuffle
) random selections in [0, n-1], the code will “fairly” select one of _n_² (or 2×_n_²) ways to shuffle the deck. The trouble is that there are n! = _n_×(n-1)×⋯×2×1 possible arrangements of the array, and neither _n_² nor 2×_n_² is a multiple of n!, proving that some permutations are more likely than others.
The Fisher-Yates shuffle is actually equivalent to your second suggestion, only with some optimizations that change (performance = 0, complexity = serious) to (performance = very good, complexity = pretty simple). (Actually, I’m not sure that a faster or simpler correct version exists.)
void fisher_yates_shuffle(size_t n, int a[n]) {
for (size_t i = 0; i < n; i++)
swap(a, i, i+randn(n-1-i)); // swap element with random later element
}
ETA: See also this post on Coding Horror.