If i am not wrong, the only possible solution can be len=sizeof(arr)/sizeof(arr[0]) i.e. find the length from the array itself.
On Aug 22, 9:01 pm, saurabh singh <saurab...@gmail.com> wrote: > @dave or anyone??????? response please > > > > > > > > > > On Sun, Aug 21, 2011 at 12:43 PM, saurabh singh <saurab...@gmail.com> wrote: > > kkk...not sure > > assume no number is greater than 1000(I mentioned There has to be some > > additional constraints to make the problem solvable).... > > Now check 1st element if not the desired element keep multiplying with 2 > > the previous range till either one of these condition is satisfied > > *1.An exception is caught* > > *2.Number greater than 1000 occurs.* > > suppose this happens for *1024 *for the given example. > > then we will check out for (512+1024)/2 th element for the above condition. > > If true than again branch like binary search.This way can element which on > > left side doesn't gives any exception and maintains the constraints while on > > the right it violates the same.So we may land up with the desired index and > > can then perform binary search....... > > > PS:There are lots of assumption in this approach and the more I write the > > more I get convinced that its a plain stupid idea... > > > -- > > Saurabh Singh > > B.Tech (Computer Science) > > MNNIT ALLAHABAD > > -- > Saurabh Singh > B.Tech (Computer Science) > MNNIT ALLAHABAD -- 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 algogeeks+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/algogeeks?hl=en.
