We Keep Coding

In Java code i the method i created only put the first duplicate instance to a new array

I want to remove the duplicates by putting them in a new array but somehow I only get a first instance and a bunch of zeros.
Here is my code:
public class JavaApplication7 {
public static void main(String[] args) {
int[] arr = new int[] {1,1,2,2,2,2,3,4,5,6,7,8};
int[] res = removeD(arr);
for (int i = 0; i < res.length; i++) {
System.out.print(res[i] + " ");
}
}
public static int[] removeD(int[] ar) {
int[] tempa = new int[ar.length];
for (int i = 0; i < ar.length; i++) {
if (ar[i] == ar[i+1]) {
tempa[i] = ar[i];
return tempa;
}
}
return null;
}
}
expected: 1,2
result: 1,0,0,0,0,0,0....

why dont you make use of HashSet?
final int[] arr = new int[] { 1, 1, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 };
final Set<Integer> set = new HashSet<>();
for (final int i : arr) {
// makes use of Integer's hashCode() and equals()
set.add(Integer.valueOf(i));
}
// primitive int array without zeros
final int[] newIntArray = new int[set.size()];
int counter = 0;
final Iterator<Integer> iterator = set.iterator();
while (iterator.hasNext()) {
newIntArray[counter] = iterator.next().intValue();
counter++;
}
for (final int i : newIntArray) {
System.out.println(i);
}
Edit
if you want your array to be ordered
final int[] arr = new int[] { 9, 9, 8, 8, 1, 1, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 };
Set<Integer> set = new HashSet<>();
for (final int i : arr) {
// makes use of Integer's hashCode() and equals()
set.add(Integer.valueOf(i));
}
// priomitive int array without zeros
final int[] newIntArray = new int[set.size()];
int counter = 0;
// SetUtils.orderedSet(set) requires apache commons collections
set = SetUtils.orderedSet(set);
final Iterator<Integer> iterator = set.iterator();
while (iterator.hasNext()) {
newIntArray[counter] = iterator.next().intValue();
counter++;
}
for (final int i : newIntArray) {
System.out.println(i);
}

A couple of points to help you:
1) With this: for(int i =0; i<ar.length; i++){ - you will get an IndexOutOfBoundsException because you are checking [i+1]. Hint: it is only the last element that will cause this...
2) Because you're initialising the second array with the length of the original array, every non-duplicate will be a 0 in it, as each element is initialised with a 0 by default. So perhaps you need to find how many duplicates there are first, before setting the size.
3) As mentioned in the comments, you are returning the array once the first duplicate is found, so remove that and just return the array at the end of the method.
4) You will also get multiple 2s because when you check i with i+1, it will find 3 2s and update tempa with each of them, so you'll need to consider how to not to include duplicates you've already found - based on your expected result.
These points should help you get the result you desire - if I (or someone else) just handed you the answer, you wouldn't learn as much as if you researched it yourself.

Here:
int[] tempa = new int[ar.length];
That creates a new array with the same size as the incoming one. All slots in that array are initialized with 0s!
When you then put some non-0 values into the first slots, sure, those stick, but so do the 0s in all the later slots that you don't "touch".
Thus: you either have to use a data structure where you can dynamically add new elements (like List/ArrayList), or you have to first iterate the input array to determine the exact count of objects you need, to then create an appropriately sized array, to then fill that array.

Return statement
As both commenters said, you return from the method as soon as you find your first duplicate. To resolve that issue, move the return to the end of the method.
Index problems
You will then run into another issue, an ArrayIndexOutOfBoundsException because when you are checking your last item (i = ar.length - 1) which in your example would be 11 you are then comparing if ar[11] == ar[12] but ar has size 12 so index 12 is out of the bounds of the array. You could solve that by changing your exit condition of the for loop to i < ar.length - 1.
Zeros
The zeros in your current output come from the initialization. You initialize your tempa with int[ar.length] this means in the memory it will reserve space for 12 ints which are initialized with zero. You will have the same problem after resolving both issues above. Your output would look like this: 1 0 2 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0. This is because you use the same index for tempa and ar. You could solve that problem in different ways. Using a List, Filtering the array afterwards, etc. It depends what you want to do exactly.
The code below has the two first issues solved:
public class JavaApplication7 {
public static void main(String[] args) {
int[] arr = new int[] { 1, 1, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 };
int[] res = removeD(arr);
for (int i = 0; i < res.length; i++) {
System.out.print(res[i] + " ");
}
}
public static int[] removeD(int[] ar) {
int[] tempa = new int[ar.length];
for (int i = 0; i < ar.length - 1; i++) {
if (ar[i] == ar[i + 1]) {
tempa[i] = ar[i];
}
}
return tempa;
}
}

There were a some error mentioned already:
return exits the method.
with arr[i+1] the for condition should bei+1 < arr.length`.
the resulting array may be smaller.
So:
public static int[] removeD(int[] ar) {
// Arrays.sort(ar);
int uniqueCount = 0;
for (int i = 0; i < ar.length; ++i) {
if (i == 0 || ar[i] != ar[i - 1]) {
++uniqueCount;
}
}
int[] uniques = new int[uniqueCount];
int uniqueI = 0;
for (int i = 0; i < ar.length; ++i) {
if (i == 0 || ar[i] != ar[i - 1]) {
uniques[uniqueI] = arr[i];
++uniqueI;
}
}
return uniques;
}

Adding elements to the beginning of an array of ints

Working on an addBefore() method that adds a new element to the beginning of an array of ints and then causes the existing elements to increase their index by one.
This is what is showing in the console when trying to run --
java.lang.RuntimeException: Index 1 should have value 11 but instead has 0
at IntArrayListTest.main(IntArrayListTest.java:67)
Below is the code I have so far.
public class IntArrayList {
private int[] a;
private int length;
private int index;
private int count;
public IntArrayList() {
length = 0;
a = new int[4];
}
public int get(int i) {
if (i < 0 || i >= length) {
throw new ArrayIndexOutOfBoundsException(i);
}
return a[i];
}
public int size() {
return length;
}
public void set(int i, int x) {
if (i < 0 || i >= a.length) {
throw new ArrayIndexOutOfBoundsException(i);
}
a[i] = x;
}
public void add(int x) {
if (length >= a.length) {
int[] b = new int[a.length * 2];
for (int i = 0; i < a.length; i++) {
b[i] = a[i];
}
a = b;
//count += 1;
}
a[length] = x;
count++;
length = length + 1;
}
public void addBefore(int x) {
int[] b = new int[a.length*2];
for (int i = 0; i < a.length; i++) {
b[i+a.length] = a[i];
}
a = b;
a[index] = x;
length ++;
}
}

Whether you add first or last, you need to only grow the array size if it is already full.
The count field seems to be exactly the same as length, and index seems unused and meaningless as a field, so remove them both.
To rearrange values in an array, use this method:
System.arraycopy(Object src, int srcPos, Object dest, int destPos, int length)
You two "add" methods should then be:
public class IntArrayList {
private int[] a; // Underlying array
private int length; // Number of added elements in a
// other code
public void add(int x) {
if (length == a.length) {
int[] b = new int[a.length * 2];
System.arraycopy(a, 0, b, 0, length);
a = b;
}
a[length++] = x;
}
public void addBefore(int x) {
if (length < a.length) {
System.arraycopy(a, 0, a, 1, length);
} else {
int[] b = new int[a.length * 2];
System.arraycopy(a, 0, b, 1, length);
a = b;
}
a[0] = x;
length++;
}
}

If the answer requires you to do the looping yourself then something like this should work fine (one of a few ways to do this, but is O(n)) :
public void addBefore(int x) {
if(length + 1 >= a.length){
int[] b = new int[a.length*2];
b[0] = x;
for (int i = 0; i < length; i++) {
b[i + 1] = a[i];
}
a = b;
} else {
for (int i = length; i >= 0 ; i--) {
a[i + 1] = a[i];
}
a[0] = x;
}
length++;
}
I noticed this started running a "speed test" - not sure how useful a test like that is, as it would be based on cpu performance, rather than testing complexity of the algorithm ..

you had three problems with your solution:
you increased the length of a every time the method was called. this would quickly create an OutOfMemoryException
when you copied values from a to b, you did b[i+a.length] = a[i]; which means the values would be copied to the middle of b instead of shift just one place
at the end, you put the new value in the end of the array instead of at the beginning.
all this I was able to see because I used a debugger on your code. You need to start using this tool if you want to be able to detect and fix problems in your code.
so fixed solution would do this:
check if a is full (just like it is done with add() method) and if so, create b, and copy everything to it and so on)
move all values one place ahead. the easiest way to do it is to loop backwards from length to 0
assign new value at the beginning of the array
here is a working solution:
public void addBefore(int x) {
// increase length if a is full
if (length >= a.length) {
int[] b = new int[a.length * 2];
for (int i = 0; i < a.length; i++) {
b[i] = a[i];
}
a = b;
}
// shift all values one cell ahead
for (int i = length; i > 0; i--) {
a[i] = a[i-1];
}
// add new value as first cell
a[0] = x;
length ++;
}
}

You can use the existing Java methods from the Colt library. Here is a small example that uses a Python syntax (to make the example code small I use Jython):
from cern.colt.list import IntArrayList
a=IntArrayList()
a.add(1); a.add(2) # add two integer numbers
print "size=",a.size(),a
a.beforeInsert(0, 10) # add 10 before index 0
print "size=",a.size(),a
You can use DataMelt program to run this code. The output of the above code is:
size= 2 [1, 2]
size= 3 [10, 1, 2]
As you can see, 10 is inserted before 1 (and the size is increased)
Feel free to change the codding to Java, i.e. importing this class as
import cern.colt.list.IntArrayList
IntArrayList a= new IntArrayList()

You could use an ArrayList instead and then covert it to an Integer[] Array which could simplify your code. Here is an example below:
First create the ArrayList:
ArrayList<Integer> myNums = new ArrayList<Integer>();
Next you can add the values that you want to it, but I chose to just add the numbers 2-5, to illustrate that we can make the number 1 the first index and automatically increment each value by one index. That can simplify your addBefore() method to something such as this:
public static void addBefore(ArrayList<Integer> aList) {
int myInt = 1;
aList.add(0, myInt);
}
Since your ArrayList has ONE memory location in Java, altering the Array within a method will work (this would also work for a regular Array). We can then add any value to the beginning of the ArrayList. You can pass an Integer to this method as the second argument (int x), if you want, but I simply created the myInt primitive to simplify the code. I know that in your code you had the (int x) parameter, and you can add that to this method. You can use the ArrayList.add() method to add the int to index 0 of the Array which will increment each Array element by 1 position. Next you will need to call the method:
addBefore(myNums);//You can add the int x parameter and pass that as an arg if you want here
Next we can use the ArrayList.toArray() method in order to covert the ArrayList to an Integer Array. Here is an example below:
Integer[] integerHolder = new Integer[myNums.size()];
Integer[] numsArray = (Integer[])myNums.toArray(integerHolder);
System.out.println(Arrays.toString(numsArray));
First we create an ArrayHolder that will be the same size as your ArrayList, and then we create the Array that will store the elements of the ArrayList. We cast the myNums.toArray() to an Integer Array. The results will be as follows. The number 1 will be at index 0 and the rest of your elements will have incremented by 1 index:
[1, 2, 3, 4, 5]
You could do the entire process within the addBefore() method by converting the Array to an ArrayList within the method and adding (int x) to the 0 index of the ArrayList before converting it back into an Array. Since an ArrayList can only take a wrapper class object you'll simply need to convert the int primitive Array into the type Integer for this to work, but it simplifies your addBefore() method.

Getting sub-array from a 2D double[][] array [duplicate]

This question already has answers here:
What causes a java.lang.ArrayIndexOutOfBoundsException and how do I prevent it?
(26 answers)
Closed 6 years ago.
I'm trying to get a sub-array from double[][] 3x3 matrices (to calculate a determinant). I keep getting the ArrayIndexOutOfBoundsException.
Any idea why ?
public double[][] get2DSubArray(double[][] largeArray, int rowStartIndex, int rowEndIndex, int columnStartIndex, int columnEndIndex) {
double[][] subArray = new double[rowEndIndex-rowStartIndex+1][columnEndIndex-columnStartIndex+1];
for (int row = rowStartIndex; row < rowEndIndex; row++) {
subArray[row] = Arrays.copyOfRange(largeArray[row], columnStartIndex, columnEndIndex);
}
return subArray;
}

Looks like it has something to do with array initialization, the array passed to the method does not seem to be 3x3. E.g, following does not produce an Exception:
public static void main(String[] args) throws IOException {
double[][] array = new double[][]{{1d,1d,1d},{2d,2d,2d},{3d,3d,3d}};
double[][] subArray = get2DSubArray(array, 1, 2, 1, 2);
for(double[] arrayElement : subArray){
for(double number : arrayElement){
System.out.println(number);
}
}
}
public static double[][] get2DSubArray(double[][] largeArray, int rowStartIndex, int rowEndIndex, int columnStartIndex,
int columnEndIndex) {
double[][] subArray = new double[rowEndIndex - rowStartIndex + 1][columnEndIndex - columnStartIndex + 1];
for (int row = rowStartIndex; row < rowEndIndex; row++) {
subArray[row] = Arrays.copyOfRange(largeArray[row], columnStartIndex, columnEndIndex);
}
return subArray;
}
Update
Although the above solution does not produce an Exception, it does not produce correct output as well. Mainly because of the following reasons:
Third argument for Arrays.copyOfRange method is exclusive, so we have to pass columnEndIndex+1 for it to work
for loop only executes once for provided set of arguments whereas it should execute at least twice
Instead of assigning Arrays.copyOfRange to subArray[row], we need to assign it to subArray[<zero based index>]
Below solution does work:
public double[][] get2DSubArray(double[][] largeArray, int rowStartIndex, int rowEndIndex, int columnStartIndex,
int columnEndIndex) {
double[][] subArray = new double[rowEndIndex - rowStartIndex + 1][columnEndIndex - columnStartIndex + 1];
int index = 0;
for (int row = rowStartIndex; row <= rowEndIndex; row++) {
subArray[index++] = Arrays.copyOfRange(largeArray[row], columnStartIndex, columnEndIndex+1);
}
return subArray;
}

If the row start was 500 and the end was 505, the variable in the for loop would start at 500 instead of 0. You want to replace "subArray[row] =" with "subArray[row-rowStartIndex] =". You are referencing where it would of been in the larger array compared to where the copy will be in the smaller array.
Edit:
//Fixed Version:
public static double[][] get2DSubArray(double[][] largeArray, int rowStartIndex, int rowEndIndex, int columnStartIndex,
int columnEndIndex) {
double[][] subArray = new double[rowEndIndex - rowStartIndex + 1][columnEndIndex - columnStartIndex + 1];
for (int row = rowStartIndex; row <= rowEndIndex; row++) {
subArray[row-rowStartIndex] = Arrays.copyOfRange(largeArray[row], columnStartIndex, columnEndIndex+1);
}
return subArray;
}

Eliminating Recursion

I've just been looking at the following piece of code
package test;
import java.util.ArrayList;
import java.util.Arrays;
import java.util.List;
public class Main {
public static void main(final String[] args) {
final int sizeA = 3;
final int sizeB = 5;
final List<int[]> combos = getAllCombinations(sizeA-1, sizeB);
int counter = 1;
for(final int[] combo : combos) {
System.out.println("Combination " + counter);
System.out.println("--------------");
for(final int value : combo) {
System.out.print(value + " ");
}
System.out.println();
System.out.println();
++counter;
}
}
private static List<int[]> getAllCombinations(final int maxIndex, final int size) {
if(maxIndex >= size)
throw new IllegalArgumentException("The maximum index must be smaller than the array size.");
final List<int[]> result = new ArrayList<int[]>();
if(maxIndex == 0) {
final int[] array = new int[size];
Arrays.fill(array, maxIndex);
result.add(array);
return result;
}
//We'll create one array for every time the maxIndex can occur while allowing
//every other index to appear, then create every variation on that array
//by having every possible head generated recursively
for(int i = 1; i < size - maxIndex + 1; ++i) {
//Generating every possible head for the array
final List<int[]> heads = getAllCombinations(maxIndex - 1, size - i);
//Combining every head with the tail
for(final int[] head : heads) {
final int[] array = new int[size];
System.arraycopy(head, 0, array, 0, head.length);
//Filling the tail of the array with i maxIndex values
for(int j = 1; j <= i; ++j)
array[size - j] = maxIndex;
result.add(array);
}
}
return result;
}
}
I'm wondering, how do I eliminate recursion from this, so that it returns a single random combination, rather than a list of all possible combinations?
Thanks

If I understand your code correctly your task is as follows: give a random combination of numbers '0' .. 'sizeA-1' of length sizeB where
the combination is sorted
each number occurs at least once
i.e. in your example e.g. [0,0,1,2,2].
If you want to have a single combination only I'd suggest another algorithm (pseudo-code):
Randomly choose the step-up positions (e.g. for sequence [0,0,1,1,2] it would be steps (1->2) & (3->4)) - we need sizeA-1 steps randomly chosen at sizeB-1 positions.
Calculate your target combination out of this vector
A quick-and-dirty implementation in java looks like follows
// Generate list 0,1,2,...,sizeB-2 of possible step-positions
List<Integer> steps = new ArrayList<Integer>();
for (int h = 0; h < sizeB-1; h++) {
steps.add(h);
}
// Randomly choose sizeA-1 elements
Collections.shuffle(steps);
steps = steps.subList(0, sizeA - 1);
Collections.sort(steps);
// Build result array
int[] result = new int[sizeB];
for (int h = 0, o = 0; h < sizeB; h++) {
result[h] = o;
if (o < steps.size() && steps.get(o) == h) {
o++;
}
}
Note: this can be optimized further - the first step generates a random permutation and later strips this down to desired size. Therefore it is just for demonstration purpose that the algorithm itself works as desired.

This appears to be homework. Without giving you code, here's an idea. Call getAllCombinations, store the result in a List, and return a value from a random index in that list. As Howard pointed out in his comment to your question, eliminating recursion, and returning a random combination are separate tasks.

Tips implementing permutation algorithm in Java

As part of a school project, I need to write a function that will take an integer N and return a two-dimensional array of every permutation of the array {0, 1, ..., N-1}. The declaration would look like public static int[][] permutations(int N).
The algorithm described at http://www.usna.edu/Users/math/wdj/book/node156.html is how I've decided to implement this.
I wrestled for quite a while with arrays and arrays of ArrayLists and ArrayLists of ArrayLists, but so far I've been frustrated, especially trying to convert a 2d ArrayList to a 2d array.
So I wrote it in javascript. This works:
function allPermutations(N) {
// base case
if (N == 2) return [[0,1], [1,0]];
else {
// start with all permutations of previous degree
var permutations = allPermutations(N-1);
// copy each permutation N times
for (var i = permutations.length*N-1; i >= 0; i--) {
if (i % N == 0) continue;
permutations.splice(Math.floor(i/N), 0, permutations[Math.floor(i/N)].slice(0));
}
// "weave" next number in
for (var i = 0, j = N-1, d = -1; i < permutations.length; i++) {
// insert number N-1 at index j
permutations[i].splice(j, 0, N-1);
// index j is N-1, N-2, N-3, ... , 1, 0; then 0, 1, 2, ... N-1; then N-1, N-2, etc.
j += d;
// at beginning or end of the row, switch weave direction
if (j < 0 || j >= N) {
d *= -1;
j += d;
}
}
return permutations;
}
}
So what's the best strategy to port that to Java? Can I do it with just primitive arrays? Do I need an array of ArrayLists? Or an ArrayList of ArrayLists? Or is there some other data type that's better? Whatever I use, I need to be able to convert it back into a an array of primitive arrays.
Maybe's there a better algorithm that would simplify this for me...
Thank you in advance for your advice!

As you know the number of permutations beforehand (it's N!) and also you want/have to return an int[][] I would go for an array directly. You can declare it right at the beginning with correct dimensions and return it at the end. Thus you don't have to worry about converting it afterwards at all.

Since you pretty much had it completed on your own in javascript, I'll go ahead and give you the Java code for implementing Steinhaus' permutation algorithm. I basically just ported your code to Java, leaving as much of it the same as I could, including comments.
I tested it up to N = 7. I tried to have it calculate N = 8, but it's been running for almost 10 minutes already on a 2 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo processor, and still going, lol.
I'm sure if you really worked at it you could speed this up significantly, but even then you're probably only going to be able to squeeze maybe a couple more N-values out of it, unless of course you have access to a supercomputer ;-).
Warning - this code is correct, NOT robust. If you need it robust, which you usually don't for homework assignments, then that would be an exercise left to you. I would also recommend implementing it using Java Collections, simply because it would be a great way to learn the in's and out's of the Collections API.
There's several "helper" methods included, including one to print a 2d array. Enjoy!
Update: N = 8 took 25 minutes, 38 seconds.
Edit: Fixed N == 1 and N == 2.
public class Test
{
public static void main (String[] args)
{
printArray (allPermutations (8));
}
public static int[][] allPermutations (int N)
{
// base case
if (N == 2)
{
return new int[][] {{1, 2}, {2, 1}};
}
else if (N > 2)
{
// start with all permutations of previous degree
int[][] permutations = allPermutations (N - 1);
for (int i = 0; i < factorial (N); i += N)
{
// copy each permutation N - 1 times
for (int j = 0; j < N - 1; ++j)
{
// similar to javascript's array.splice
permutations = insertRow (permutations, i, permutations [i]);
}
}
// "weave" next number in
for (int i = 0, j = N - 1, d = -1; i < permutations.length; ++i)
{
// insert number N at index j
// similar to javascript's array.splice
permutations = insertColumn (permutations, i, j, N);
// index j is N-1, N-2, N-3, ... , 1, 0; then 0, 1, 2, ... N-1; then N-1, N-2, etc.
j += d;
// at beginning or end of the row, switch weave direction
if (j < 0 || j > N - 1)
{
d *= -1;
j += d;
}
}
return permutations;
}
else
{
throw new IllegalArgumentException ("N must be >= 2");
}
}
private static void arrayDeepCopy (int[][] src, int srcRow, int[][] dest,
int destRow, int numOfRows)
{
for (int row = 0; row < numOfRows; ++row)
{
System.arraycopy (src [srcRow + row], 0, dest [destRow + row], 0,
src[row].length);
}
}
public static int factorial (int n)
{
return n == 1 ? 1 : n * factorial (n - 1);
}
private static int[][] insertColumn (int[][] src, int rowIndex,
int columnIndex, int columnValue)
{
int[][] dest = new int[src.length][0];
for (int i = 0; i < dest.length; ++i)
{
dest [i] = new int [src[i].length];
}
arrayDeepCopy (src, 0, dest, 0, src.length);
int numOfColumns = src[rowIndex].length;
int[] rowWithExtraColumn = new int [numOfColumns + 1];
System.arraycopy (src [rowIndex], 0, rowWithExtraColumn, 0, columnIndex);
System.arraycopy (src [rowIndex], columnIndex, rowWithExtraColumn,
columnIndex + 1, numOfColumns - columnIndex);
rowWithExtraColumn [columnIndex] = columnValue;
dest [rowIndex] = rowWithExtraColumn;
return dest;
}
private static int[][] insertRow (int[][] src, int rowIndex,
int[] rowElements)
{
int srcRows = src.length;
int srcCols = rowElements.length;
int[][] dest = new int [srcRows + 1][srcCols];
arrayDeepCopy (src, 0, dest, 0, rowIndex);
arrayDeepCopy (src, rowIndex, dest, rowIndex + 1, src.length - rowIndex);
System.arraycopy (rowElements, 0, dest [rowIndex], 0, rowElements.length);
return dest;
}
public static void printArray (int[][] array)
{
for (int row = 0; row < array.length; ++row)
{
for (int col = 0; col < array[row].length; ++col)
{
System.out.print (array [row][col] + " ");
}
System.out.print ("\n");
}
System.out.print ("\n");
}
}

The java arrays are not mutable (in the sense, you cannot change their length). For direct translation of this recursive algorithm you probably want to use List interface (and probably LinkedList implementation as you want put numbers in the middle). That is List<List<Integer>>.
Beware the factorial grows rapidly: for N = 13, there is 13! permutations that is 6 227 020 800. But I guess you need to run it for only small values.
The algorithm above is quite complex, my solution would be:
create List<int[]> to hold all permutations
create one array of size N and fill it with identity ({1,2,3,...,N})
program function that in place creates next permutation in lexicographical ordering
repeat this until you get the identity again:
put a copy of the array at the end of the list
call the method to get next permutation.
If your program just needs to output all permutations, I would avoid to store them and just print them right away.
The algorithm to compute next permutation can be found on internet. Here for example

Use whatever you want, arrays or lists, but don't convert them - it just makes it harder. I can't tell what's better, probably I'd go for ArrayList<int[]>, since the outer List allows me to add the permutation easily and the inner array is good enough. That's just a matter of taste (but normally prefer lists, since they're much more flexible).

As per Howard's advice, I decided I didn't want to use anything but the primitive array type. The algorithm I initially picked was a pain to implement in Java, so thanks to stalker's advice, I went with the lexicographic-ordered algorithm described at Wikipedia. Here's what I ended up with:
public static int[][] generatePermutations(int N) {
int[][] a = new int[factorial(N)][N];
for (int i = 0; i < N; i++) a[0][i] = i;
for (int i = 1; i < a.length; i++) {
a[i] = Arrays.copyOf(a[i-1], N);
int k, l;
for (k = N - 2; a[i][k] >= a[i][k+1]; k--);
for (l = N - 1; a[i][k] >= a[i][l]; l--);
swap(a[i], k, l);
for (int j = 1; k+j < N-j; j++) swap(a[i], k+j, N-j);
}
return a;
}
private static void swap(int[] is, int k, int l) {
int tmp_k = is[k];
int tmp_l = is[l];
is[k] = tmp_l;
is[l] = tmp_k;
}