Conversation

Notices

  1. adiwan adiwan

    I have no clue how to make an unbounded array that does a push back, get and set in O(1) without amortized costs. !coderponies

    Wednesday, 17-Apr-13 18:05:09 UTC from Choqok
    1. Pony Pony

      off to bed now. later po-knees

      Wednesday, 17-Apr-13 18:29:34 UTC from web
    2. Pony Pony

      @broniebrown maybe uhm.. avoid using a linked list and implement it using memory addresses? It's been years since I took Data Structures so feel free to ignore this.

      Wednesday, 17-Apr-13 18:41:11 UTC from web
      1. adiwan adiwan

        @pony Linked lists are not what I have to implement. It should be like a vector but a bit different such that there are no amortized costs.

        Wednesday, 17-Apr-13 18:50:23 UTC from Choqok
        1. Pony Pony

          @broniebrown I remember a sort algorithm that's O log(n) but I don't remember that. Maybe Google knows?

          Wednesday, 17-Apr-13 18:52:29 UTC from web
          1. adiwan adiwan

            @pony No sort algorithm I know works in O(log(n)). There are that work in O(n*log(n)). You mean the search algorithm that only works with sorted arrays.

            Wednesday, 17-Apr-13 18:58:03 UTC from Choqok
            1. Pony Pony

              @broniebrown maybe.. Like I said. it's been a while. I'm thinking of one that sorts first by the number of digits in the relative integer value of an object then sorts by the digit values themselves.

              Wednesday, 17-Apr-13 19:08:38 UTC from web