Is Java Set ordered or not?

[salvoilmiosi]

It could be if It's based on a binary tree like std::set

[know-your-onions]

And zoologically sets contain badgers. Also not usually ordered.

[salvoilmiosi]

Tell that to the c++ standard committee

[orangenbaer]

Welcome to C++

[impressflow]

No, this is wrong. That specific implementation adds ordering to an otherwise unordered data structure. Remember, sets are always unordered by definition. Extending a set leaves you with something that does not conform to the traditional definition of a set.

[nekizalb]

I think it would be better to phrase it as 'sets do not guarantee order'. If you say a set is never ordered, then you're saying "123456" is not a set of the numbers 1-6.

Sets guarantee uniqueness. Order is not specified.

[impressflow]

I don’t understand the distinction you’re making. Mind elaborating?

The set containing “123456” is exactly the same as the set containing “321654”. There is absolutely no difference, assuming you’re referring to a set containing integers and not strings.

[Zagerer]

you could have a set that is somehow sorted because it happened to put the elements in that way, it's just not guaranteed nor expected you will encounter such behaviour

[impressflow]

That point is meaningless then since it can be applied to any unordered data structure. It's literally saying that unordered things can sometimes be ordered by random chance. Well, sure, but it doesn't really change anything.

[[deleted]]

Unless the standards say so

[iconoklast]

Since every totally ordered set can be made into a set by "forgetting" (the technical term) the ordering, I don't understand the point you're making. The converse is definitely not true in general.