On Feb 28, 8:06 pm, "k3xji" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Is there any way of calculating the depth of a binary tree without
> using *recursive way*.Also not using *log2-1* method.I am asking this
> because Is there any way of doing this kind of operation with just
> using stacks or quenes.
Yes. You can "simulate" recursion by explicitly creating your own
stack and storing the pointers to the traversed nodes OR Create a
threaded (inorder) binary tree, this too eliminates the need of
recursion when traversing the tree in order.
This solution is offered in a standard book on data structures by
Tanenbaum.
>In other words, is there a some kind of
> compiler optimization just to avoid recursive call overhead?
Not an optimization per se but the above avoids the recursion overhead
>Here is
> the recursive one (pseudo): Any comments?(Also optimization is not
> important here.Is it just possible to implement an algorithm using one
> stack or one quene,like traversal methods do?)
Which "other" traversal methods are you talking about? The 'graph'
traversal methods are usually specified recursively as they are easier
to read/understand that way.
Regards,
Nupul
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Algorithm Geeks" group.
To post to this group, send email to algogeeks@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/algogeeks
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
