对于番石榴，我们可以做得比霍斯的答案更好一点:

public static E random(Set<E> set) {
  int index = random.nextInt(set.size();
  if (set instanceof ImmutableSet) {
    // ImmutableSet.asList() is O(1), as is .get() on the returned list
    return set.asList().get(index);
  }
  return Iterables.get(set, index);
}

在lisp中

(defun pick-random (set)
       (nth (random (length set)) set))

这比接受答案中的for-each循环要快:

int index = rand.nextInt(set.size());
Iterator<Object> iter = set.iterator();
for (int i = 0; i < index; i++) {
    iter.next();
}
return iter.next();

for-each构造在每次循环时调用Iterator.hasNext()，但由于index < set.size()，该检查是不必要的开销。我看到速度提高了10-20%，但是YMMV。(而且，编译时不需要添加额外的return语句。)

请注意，这段代码(以及大多数其他答案)可以应用于任何集合，而不仅仅是集合。通用方法形式:

public static <E> E choice(Collection<? extends E> coll, Random rand) {
    if (coll.size() == 0) {
        return null; // or throw IAE, if you prefer
    }

    int index = rand.nextInt(coll.size());
    if (coll instanceof List) { // optimization
        return ((List<? extends E>) coll).get(index);
    } else {
        Iterator<? extends E> iter = coll.iterator();
        for (int i = 0; i < index; i++) {
            iter.next();
        }
        return iter.next();
    }
}

Clojure的解决方案:

(defn pick-random [set] (let [sq (seq set)] (nth sq (rand-int (count sq)))))

int size = myHashSet.size();
int item = new Random().nextInt(size); // In real life, the Random object should be rather more shared than this
int i = 0;
for(Object obj : myhashSet)
{
    if (i == item)
        return obj;
    i++;
}

如果设置的大小不是很大，那么使用数组可以做到这一点。

int random;
HashSet someSet;
<Type>[] randData;
random = new Random(System.currentTimeMillis).nextInt(someSet.size());
randData = someSet.toArray();
<Type> sResult = randData[random];