I am trying to find the distance of a node from the root of a binary tree but I am getting right answer up to only 3 branches only. like for the node(4) I am getting 3 and for the node (9) and node(10) I am getting 3
#include<bits/stdc++.h>
using namespace std;
struct node
{
int data;
struct node *left;
struct node *right;
node(int val)
{
data = val;
left = NULL;
right = NULL;
}
};
int find_node(node* root,int n)
{
static int length=1;
if (root== NULL)
{
return 0;
}
if (root->data==n)
{
return length;
}
length=length+(find_node(root->left,n)||find_node(root->right,n));
// find_node(root->left,n);
// find_node(root->right,n);
return length;
}
int main ()
{
struct node* root = new node(1);
root->left = new node(2);
root->right = new node(3);
root->left->left = new node(4);
root->left->right = new node(5);
root->right->left = new node(6);
root->right->right = new node(7);
root->right->right->right = new node(9);
root->right->right->right->right = new node(10);
cout <<find_node(root,10);
return 0;}
When your code reaches the first leaf node (with data 4), the following assignment will assign 1:
length=length+(find_node(root->left,n)||find_node(root->right,n));
Because the expression resolves to 1+(0||0), i.e. 1. And so 1 is returned.
The caller (at the node with data 2) will thus receive this 1, and so the above statement will yield 2, since it resolves to 1+(1||......), which is 2 -- the second operand of || is not evaluated.
The parent caller (at the node with data 1), will thus receive this 2. The assignment there resolves to 1+(2||.....), which is again 2 -- realise that || is a logical operator, so it can only evaluate to a boolean value (i.e. 0 or 1).
The issues
In summmary:
You should not use || as it can only evaluate to 0 or 1, losing the actual value from recursion that you need.
You should not use a static variable. For one, it would not reset if you would make a second call to this function from the main program code. Instead, every recursive call should just "mind its own business" and return the depth of n from the given root. The caller should add 1 to that if n was found.
Correction
int find_node(node* root, int n)
{
if (root == NULL)
{
return 0;
}
if (root->data == n)
{
return 1;
}
int length = find_node(root->left, n);
if (!length)
{
length = find_node(root->right, n);
}
if (!length)
{
return 0;
}
return 1 + length;
}
Related
I've been trying to figure out how to prevent a user from entering a duplicate value and honestly I am struggling so much for an answer that's probably really simple once I see it, but I can't. The function is below along with the struct node. I would really appreciate it if someone could help me out here.
struct node {
int data = -1;
node * current;
node * next;
};
node * start = NULL;
```
void addNode(struct node & n) {
if (n.data == -1) {
cout << "List not created yet." << endl;
} else {
node * temp;
node * temp2;
temp = new node;
cout << "What number would you like to enter:" << endl;
cin >> temp -> data;
cout << endl;
int value;
value = temp -> data;
temp = start;
while (temp != NULL) {
if (temp -> data == value) {
cout << "Duplicate Number!" << endl;
} else {
temp = temp -> next;
}
temp = temp -> next;
}
if (start == NULL) {
start = temp;
} else {
temp2 = start;
while (temp2 -> next != NULL) {
temp2 = temp2 -> next;
}
temp2 -> next = temp;
}
}
}
Here are some remarks on your code:
Don't make start a global variable. Instead make it local to main and pass it as argument to the addNode function
Use nullptr instead of NULL
Don't ask for the user's input inside the addNode function. By the principle of separation of concern, keep the I/O aspects outside that function.
Instead pass the value as argument to addNode
You should treat a node differently when it has the value -1. An empty list is not a list with one node that has the value -1. An empty list is a null pointer.
Even if a list is empty, it should be possible to add the first node with this function
Use more descriptive variable names. n for a node instance is not very clear. Also temp and temp2 are not very clear. One of the two is the newly created node, so it could be named newNode.
After you have created the new node, and assigned its reference to temp, you assign a new value to temp with temp = start, and so you've lost (and leaked) the newly created node.
In your loop, you'll execute temp = temp->next twice when the value does not match. This should of course only be done once per iteration.
Even when your code finds a duplicate and outputs a message, it still continues the process. Instead you should stop the process, and not create the node (or if you already did: dispose it with delete).
It is a pity that you need to traverse the list again from the start to find the last node and append the new node there. You should be able to do that in the first loop where you look for the duplicate.
Here is a correction:
bool addNode(node* &start, int value) {
node * current = start;
if (start != nullptr) {
while (current->data != value && current->next != nullptr) {
current = current->next;
}
if (current->data == value) {
return false; // duplicate!
}
}
node* newNode = new node;
newNode->data = value;
if (start != nullptr) {
current->next = newNode;
} else {
start = newNode;
}
return true;
}
Note that this function returns a boolean: if true then the node was inserted. The other case means there was a duplicate.
Your main function could look like this:
int main() {
// define start as local variable
node * start = nullptr; // Use nullptr instead of NULL
while (true) {
int value;
// Don't do I/O together with list-logic
cout << "What number would you like to enter:" << endl;
cin >> value;
cout << endl;
if (value == -1) break;
if (!addNode(start, value)) {
cout << "Duplicate Number!" << endl;
}
}
}
I am currently trying to formulate a mergeSort mechanism for a singly linked list. Through research and finding consistent ideas about A) a merge sort being the best way to sort a singly linked list, and B) that these are the key components for performing such an operation, I have arrived at this following code. It almost works exactly as intended, but will only return all of the integers larger than the last inputted number. For example, inputting 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1 will return 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, but inputting 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 will only return 5. I've used random input orders so it's not a problem localised to just inputting the numbers in reverse order, but literally any order. If a number is smaller than the final number, it gets removed from the list in the sort process. I cannot locate the cause for this at all. My original problem was caused by an errant while loop that was stopping the iterations after one go, so once I removed that the merge sort was working, but for this problem I have just described.
Any and all advice or suggestions are more than welcome, and thanks for any input you have. My knowledge of linked lists and recursion isn't the greatest, so I really welcome all input/constructive criticism here.
public Node mergeSort(Node head) {
if (head == null || head.getNext() == null) return head;
Node midpoint = findMidpoint(head);
Node rightliststart = midpoint.getNext();
midpoint.setNext(null);
Node rightlist = mergeSort(rightliststart);
Node sorted = sort(leftlist, rightlist);
return sorted;
}
public Node findMidpoint(Node head) {
if (head == null) return head;
Node slowpointer = head;
Node fastpointer = slowpointer.getNext();
while (fastpointer != null) {
fastpointer = fastpointer.getNext();
if (fastpointer != null) {
slowpointer = slowpointer.getNext();
fastpointer = fastpointer.getNext();
}
}
return slowpointer;
}
public Node sort(Node one, Node two) {
Node temp = null;
if (one == null) return two;
if (two == null) return one;
if (one.getData() <= two.getData()) {
temp = one;
temp.setNext(sort(one.getNext(), two));
} else {
temp = two;
temp.setNext(sort(one, two.getNext()));
}
return temp;
}
Example merge code. This shows how the dummy node is used to simplify the code (avoids special case to update head on first node merged).
// merge two already sorted lists
static Node merge(Node list0, Node list1) {
if(list0 == null)
return list1;
if(list1 == null)
return list0;
Node temp = new Node(); // dummy node
Node dest = temp;
while(true){
if(list0.data <= list1.data){
dest.next = list0;
dest = list0;
list0 = list0.next;
if(list0 == null){
dest.next = list1;
break;
}
} else {
dest.next = list1;
dest = list1;
list1 = list1.next;
if(list1 == null){
dest.next = list0;
break;
}
}
}
return temp.next;
}
Example top down merge sort code. It scans the list one time to get the size of the list to avoid double scanning (fast, slow), only scanning n/2 nodes for each recursive split.
// return size of list
static int size(Node head) {
int i = 0;
while(head != null){
head = head.next;
i++;
}
return i;
}
// advance to node n
static Node advance(Node head, int n) {
while(0 < n--)
head = head.next;
return head;
}
// top down merge sort for single link list entry function
static Node sorttd(Node head) {
int n = size(head);
if(n < 2)
return head;
head = sorttdr(head, n);
return head;
}
// top down merge sort for single link list recursive function
static Node sorttdr(Node head, int n) {
if(n < 2)
return head;
int n2 = (n/2);
Node node = advance(head, n2-1);
Node next = node.next;
node.next = null;
head = sorttdr(head, n2);
next = sorttdr(next, n-n2);
head = merge(head, next);
return head;
}
Example bottom up merge sort code. It uses a small (32) array of lists, where array[i] is a list with 0 (empty slot) or 2^i nodes. array[{0 1 2 3 4 ...}] = sorted sub-lists with 0 or {1 2 4 8 16 ...} nodes. Nodes are merged into the array one at a time. A working list is created via a sequence of merge steps with a caller's list node and the leading non-empty slots in the array. The size of the working list doubles with each merge step. After each non-empty slot is used to merge into the working list, that slot is set to empty. After each sequence of merge steps is done, the first empty slot after the leading non-empty slots is set to the working list. A prior slots will now be empty. Once all nodes are merged into the array, the array is merged into a single sorted list. On a large list that doesn't fit in cache, and with randomly scattered nodes, there will be a lot of cache misses for each node accessed, in which case bottom up merge sort is about 30% faster than top down.
// bottom up merge sort for single link list
static Node sortbu(Node head) {
final int NUMLIST = 32;
Node[] alist = new Node[NUMLIST];
Node node;
Node next;
int i;
// if < 2 nodes, return
if(head == null || head.next == null)
return null;
node = head;
// merge node into array
while(node != null){
next = node.next;
node.next = null;
for(i = 0; (i < NUMLIST) && (alist[i] != null); i++){
node = merge(alist[i], node);
alist[i] = null;
}
if(i == NUMLIST) // don't go past end of array
i--;
alist[i] = node;
node = next;
}
// node == null
// merge array into single list
for(i = 0; i < NUMLIST; i++)
node = merge(alist[i], node);
return node;
}
I am trying to find the middle element of a double linked list in constant time complexity .
I came across the following http://www.geeksforgeeks.org/design-a-stack-with-find-middle-operation/ solution.
But I don't understand how to use the middle pointer.
Can anyone please help me understand this or give me a better solution .
I've re-written this code in C++ for explanation purposes:
#include <iostream>
typedef class Node* PNode;
class Node{
public:
PNode next;
PNode prev;
int data;
Node(){
next = nullptr;
prev = nullptr;
data = 0;
}
};
class List{
private:
//Attributes
PNode head;
PNode mid;
int count;
//Methods
void UpdateMiddle( bool _add );
public:
//Constructors
List(){
head = nullptr;
mid = nullptr;
count = 0;
}
~List(){
while( head != nullptr ){
this->delmiddle();
std::cout << count << std::endl;
}
}
//Methods
void push( int _data );
void pop();
int findmiddle();
void delmiddle();
};
void List::UpdateMiddle( bool _add ){
if( count == 0 ){
mid = nullptr;
}
else if( count == 1 ){
mid = head;
}
else{
int remainder = count%2;
if(_add){
if( remainder == 0 ){
mid = mid->prev;
}
}
else{
if( remainder == 1 ){
mid = mid->next;
}
}
}
}
void List::push( int _data ){
PNode new_node = new Node();
new_node->data = _data;
new_node->prev = nullptr;
new_node->next = head;
if( head != nullptr ) head->prev = new_node;
head = new_node;
count++;
UpdateMiddle( true );
}
void List::pop(){
if( head != nullptr ){
PNode del_node = head;
head = head->next;
if( head != nullptr ) head->prev = nullptr;
delete del_node;
count--;
UpdateMiddle(false);
}
else if( count != 0 ){
std::cout << "ERROR";
return;
}
}
int List::findmiddle(){
if( count > 0 ) return mid->data;
else return -1;
}
void List::delmiddle(){
if( mid != nullptr ){
if( count == 1 || count == 2){
this->pop();
}
else{
PNode del_mid = mid;
int remainder = count%2;
if( remainder == 0 ){
mid = del_mid->next;
mid->prev = del_mid->prev;
del_mid->prev->next = mid;
delete del_mid;
count--;
}
else{
mid = del_mid->prev;
mid->next = del_mid->next;
del_mid->next->prev = mid;
delete del_mid;
count--;
}
}
}
}
The push and pop functions are self-explanatory, they add nodes on top of the stack and delete the node on the top. In this code, the function UpdateMiddle is in charge of managing the mid pointer whenever a node is added or deleted. Its parameter _add tells it whether a node has been added or deleted. This info is important when there is more than two nodes.
Note that when the UpdateMiddle is called within push or pop, the counter has already been increased or decreased respectively. Let's start with the base case, where there is 0 nodes. mid will simply be a nullptr. When there is one node, mid will be that one node.
Now let's take the list of numbers "5,4,3,2,1". Currently the mid is 3 and count, the amount of nodes, is 5 an odd number. Let's add a 6. It will now be "6,5,4,3,2,1" and count will now be 6 an even number. The mid should also now be 4, as it is the first in the middle, but it still hasn't updated. However, now if we add 7 it will be "7,6,5,4,3,2,1", the count will be 7, an odd number, but notice that the mid wont change, it should still be 4.
A pattern can be observed from this. When adding a node, and count changes from even to odd, the mid stays the same, but from odd to even mid changes position. More specifically, it moves one position to the left. That is basically what UpdateMiddle does. By checking whether count is currently odd or even after adding or deleting a node, it decides if mid should be repositioned or not. It is also important to tell whether a node is added or deleted because the logic works in reverse to adding when deleting. This is basically the logic that is being applied in the code you linked.
This algorith works because the position of mid should be correct at all times before adding or deleting, and function UpdateMiddle assumes that the only changes were the addition or deletion of a node, and that prior to this addition or deletion the position of mid was correct. However, we make sure of this by making the attributes and our function UpdateMiddle private, and making it modifiable through the public functions.
The trick is that you don't find it via a search, rather you constantly maintain it as a property of the list. In your link, they define a structure that contains the head node, the middle node, and the number of nodes; since the middle node is a property of the structure, you can return it by simply accessing it directly at any time. From there, the trick is to maintain it: so the push and pop functions have to adjust the middle node, which is also shown in the code.
More depth: maintaining the middle node: we know given the count that for an odd number of nodes (say 9), the middle node is "number of nodes divided by 2 rounded up," so 9/2 = 4.5 rounded up = the 5th node. So if you start with a list of 8 nodes, and add a node, the new count is 9, and you'll need to shift the middle node to the "next" node. That is what they are doing when they check if the new count is even.
Is there a better/faster way in Dart to rotate a list?
List<Object> rotate(List<Object> l, int i) {
i = i % l.length;
List<Object> x = l.sublist(i);
x.addAll(l.sublist(0, i));
return x;
}
Could be simplified a bit
List<Object> rotate(List<Object> list, int v) {
if(list == null || list.isEmpty) return list;
var i = v % list.length;
return list.sublist(i)..addAll(list.sublist(0, i));
}
If you want to shift instead of rotate you can simply use the removeAt function:
List<int> list = [ 1, 2, 3 ];
int firstElement = list.removeAt(0);
print(list); // [ 2, 3 ]
print(firstElement); // 1
From the docs:
Removes the object at position [index] from this list.
This method reduces the length of this by one and moves all later objects down by one position.
Returns the removed value.
The [index] must be in the range 0 ≤ index < length. The list must be growable.
Here are some more useful JS shims.
I was solving a problem in which given a linked list of characters , we have to move the vowels to the beginning such that both vowels and consonants are in chronological order. That is in the order in which they appear in original list.
Input : S->T->A->C->K->O->V->E->R->F->L->O->W
Output : A->O->E->O->S->T->C->K->V->R->F->L->W
I did it by traversing through the list once and created two lists called vowels and consonants and later merged them.
Can it be done without creating extra lists ? I mean in-place maybe using pointer manipulation?
Remember the beginning of the list. When you meet a vowel, move it to the beginning of the list; the vowel becomes the new beginning that you remember.
1. Traverse the list
2. When you encounter a vowel, check with head if its smaller or greater
3. If smaller, re-place new vowel before head, else move head and check again
4. In the end relocate head to first
temp = head;
while(current.next != null) {
if(current.isVowel()) {
if(head.isVowel()) {
//check the precedence
//Re-place the current with temp
}
else {
//Re-place current in front of head
}
}
current = current.next;
}
This is an abstract understanding. Implement it properly.
#include <stdio.h>
#include <string.h>
#include <ctype.h>
struct list {
struct list *next;
int ch;
};
#define IS_VOWEL(p) strchr("aeiouy", tolower(p->ch))
struct list *shuffle ( struct list *lst )
{
struct list *new=NULL, **dst, **src;
dst = &new;
for (src = &lst; *src; ) {
struct list *this;
this= *src;
if (!IS_VOWEL(this)) { src= &(*src)->next; continue; }
*src = this->next;
this->next = *dst;
*dst = this;
dst = & (*dst)->next;
}
*dst = lst;
return new;
}
int main (void)
{
struct list arr[] = { {arr+1, 'S'} , {arr+2, 'T'} , {arr+3, 'A'}
, {arr+4, 'C'} , {arr+5, 'K'} , {arr+6, 'O'}
, {arr+7, 'V'} , {arr+8, 'E'} , {arr+9, 'R'}
, {arr+10, 'F'} , {arr+11, 'L'} , {arr+12, 'O'} , {NULL, 'W'} };
struct list *result;
result = shuffle (arr);
for ( ; result; result = result->next ) {
printf( "-> %c" , result->ch );
}
printf( "\n" );
return 0;
}
OUTPUT:
-> A-> O-> E-> O-> S-> T-> C-> K-> V-> R-> F-> L-> W
You can quite easily modify pointers to create two independent lists without actually having to duplicate any of the nodes, which is what I assume you mean when you say you want to avoid creating new lists. Only the pointers in the original nodes are modified.
First let's create the structures for the list:
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
// Structure for singly linked list.
typedef struct sNode {
char ch;
struct sNode *next;
} tNode;
And next we provide two utility functions, the first to append a character to the list:
// Append to list, not very efficient but debug code anyway.
static tNode *append (tNode *head, char ch) {
// Allocate new node and populate it.
tNode *next = malloc (sizeof (tNode));
if (next == NULL) {
puts ("Out of memory");
exit (1);
}
next->ch = ch;
next->next = NULL;
// First in list, just return it.
if (head == NULL)
return next;
// Else get last, adjust pointer and return head.
tNode *this = head;
while (this->next != NULL)
this = this->next;
this->next = next;
return head;
}
And the second to dump a list for debugging purposes:
// Debug code to dump a list.
static void dump (tNode *this) {
if (this == NULL)
return;
printf ("(%08x)%c", this, this->ch);
while ((this = this->next) != NULL)
printf (" -> (%08x)%c", this, this->ch);
putchar ('\n');
}
Beyond that, we need an easy way to tell if a node is a vowel or not. For our purposes, we'll only use uppercase letters:
// Check for vowel (uppercase only here).
static int isVowel (tNode *this) {
char ch = this->ch;
return (ch == 'A') || (ch == 'E') || (ch == 'I')
|| (ch == 'O') || (ch == 'U');
}
Now this is the important bit, the bit that turns the single list into two distinct lists (one vowel, one consonant). Which list is which type depends on what the first entry in the list is.
What is basically does is to create a sub-list out of all the common nodes at the start of the list ("ST" in this case), another sub-list of the next non-matching type ("A"), and then starts processing the remaining nodes one by one, starting with "C".
As each subsequent node is examined, the pointers are adjusted to add it to either the first or second list (again, without actually creating new nodes). Once we reach the NULL at then end of the list, we then decide whether to append the second list to the first, or vice versa (vowels have to come first).
The code for all this pointer manipulation is shown below:
// Meat of the solution, reorganise the list.
static tNode *regroup (tNode *this) {
// No reorg on empty list.
if (this == NULL)
return this;
// Find first/last of type 1 (matches head), first of type 2.
tNode *firstTyp1 = this, *firstTyp2 = this, *lastTyp1 = this, *lastTyp2;
while ((firstTyp2 != NULL) && (isVowel (firstTyp1) == isVowel (firstTyp2 ))) {
lastTyp1 = firstTyp2;
firstTyp2 = firstTyp2->next;
}
// No type 2 means only one type, return list as is.
if (firstTyp2 == NULL)
return firstTyp1;
// Type 2 list has one entry, next node after that is for checking.
lastTyp2 = firstTyp2;
this = firstTyp2->next;
//dump (firstTyp1);
//dump (firstTyp2);
//putchar ('\n');
// Process nodes until list is exhausted.
while (this != NULL) {
// Adjust pointers to add to correct list.
if (isVowel (this) == isVowel (lastTyp1)) {
lastTyp2->next = this->next;
lastTyp1->next = this;
lastTyp1 = this;
} else {
lastTyp1->next = this->next;
lastTyp2->next = this;
lastTyp2 = this;
}
// Advance to next node.
this = this->next;
//dump (firstTyp1);
//dump (firstTyp2);
//putchar ('\n');
}
// Attach last of one list to first of the other,
// depending on which is the vowel list.
if (isVowel (firstTyp1)) {
lastTyp1->next = firstTyp2;
return firstTyp1;
}
lastTyp2->next = firstTyp1;
return firstTyp2;
}
And, finally, no complex program would be complete without a test harness of some description, so here it is, something to create and dump the list in its initial form, then reorganise it and dump the result:
int main (void) {
char *str = "STACKOVERFLOW";
tNode *list = NULL;
while (*str != '\0')
list = append (list, *(str++));
dump (list);
puts("");
list = regroup (list);
dump (list);
return 0;
}
Upon entering, compiling and running all that code, the results are as expected:
(09c03008)S -> (09c03018)T -> (09c03028)A -> (09c03038)C ->
(09c03048)K -> (09c03058)O -> (09c03068)V -> (09c03078)E ->
(09c03088)R -> (09c03098)F -> (09c030a8)L -> (09c030b8)O ->
(09c030c8)W
(09c03028)A -> (09c03058)O -> (09c03078)E -> (09c030b8)O ->
(09c03008)S -> (09c03018)T -> (09c03038)C -> (09c03048)K ->
(09c03068)V -> (09c03088)R -> (09c03098)F -> (09c030a8)L ->
(09c030c8)W
In case that's hard to read, I'll get rid of the pointers and just list the characters in order:
S -> T -> A -> C -> K -> O -> V -> E -> R -> F -> L -> O -> W
A -> O -> E -> O -> S -> T -> C -> K -> V -> R -> F -> L -> W