Skip to content

Solved PreCourse-2#1892

Open
anirudhv98 wants to merge 1 commit into
super30admin:masterfrom
anirudhv98:master
Open

Solved PreCourse-2#1892
anirudhv98 wants to merge 1 commit into
super30admin:masterfrom
anirudhv98:master

Conversation

@anirudhv98

Copy link
Copy Markdown

No description provided.

@super30admin

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Owner

Exercise 1 (Binary Search):

  • Correctness: The implementation is correct. It properly handles the binary search logic with the standard iterative approach.
  • Time Complexity: O(log n) - optimal for searching.
  • Space Complexity: O(1) - constant space used.
  • Code Quality: Good, clean implementation with proper variable naming. The while loop condition and mid-point calculation are correct.

Exercise 2 (QuickSort):

  • Correctness: The implementation is correct. The partition function uses Lomuto partition scheme correctly, and the recursive sort properly divides and conquers.
  • Time Complexity: O(n log n) average, O(n²) worst case.
  • Space Complexity: O(log n) for recursion stack.
  • Code Quality: Well-structured with clear separation of concerns. Could benefit from comments explaining the partition logic.

Exercise 3 (LinkedList Middle Element):

  • Correctness: Correctly implements the fast and slow pointer technique to find the middle element.
  • Time Complexity: O(n) - single pass through the list.
  • Space Complexity: O(1) - constant space.
  • Code Quality: Clean and efficient. The implementation is optimal for this problem.

Exercise 4 (MergeSort):

  • Correctness: The implementation is correct. The merge function properly combines two sorted subarrays, and the sort function recursively divides the array.
  • Time Complexity: O(n log n) - optimal for comparison-based sorting.
  • Space Complexity: O(n) for the temporary arrays.
  • Code Quality: Good implementation, though the variable name "temp" is reused for multiple purposes (array index and loop counter), which could be confusing. Consider using more descriptive variable names.

Exercise 5 (Iterative QuickSort):

  • Correctness: The implementation is correct. It successfully converts the recursive QuickSort to an iterative version using an explicit stack.
  • Time Complexity: O(n log n) average, O(n²) worst case.
  • Space Complexity: O(n) for the stack in worst case.
  • Code Quality: Good use of Stack data structure. The swap function using arithmetic is clever but could potentially cause integer overflow for very large values. Consider using bitwise XOR or a temporary variable for better safety.

Overall Assessment:
The student demonstrates solid understanding of fundamental algorithms (binary search, quicksort, merge sort, linked list operations). All implementations are functionally correct and follow standard algorithmic approaches. The code is generally readable with good indentation and structure. Minor improvements could include better variable naming in some places and considering edge case handling (like integer overflow in the swap function).

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants