ya thats one option but that gives ans in O(n), requires additional memory... and unnecessarily finds for all which is not required... my sol doesnt require any extra space i.e. in O(1) space... and also in O(log n) time...
tell if dere is any missing case.... On Aug 26, 4:58 pm, sukran dhawan <sukrandha...@gmail.com> wrote: > is it not possible to traverse tree in order and store in array. then figure > out the element and print the previous element? > > On Fri, Aug 26, 2011 at 2:04 PM, Vikram Singh <singhvikram...@gmail.com>wrote: > > > > > > > > > i figured out algo to find the inorder predecessor of a bst without > > using parent pointer... just wanna confirm if its missing any case.... > > > if the left child(subtree) of node exist, then predecessor ll be the > > max value in the left subtree. > > > else predecessor ll be one of the ancestor.... in this case, starting > > from the given node, we hv to find a closest ancestrous node which is > > right child of its parent... the parent ll be the predecessor... > > > and i made the parent implementation without changing the structure of > > the node... using while loop... > > > let me know if i m missing ant case... > > > -- > > 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. -- 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.
