no, for eg. array1 = { 1, 2, 5, 6, 7, 7, 7, 23}; array2 = { 1, 2, 2, 4, 8, 9, 12 };
then for k = 2, answer = 1 k = 3, answer = 2 k = 4, answer = 2, k = 6, answer = 4. anyway to do it iteratively in logarithmic time On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 2:27 AM, sravanreddy001 <sravanreddy...@gmail.com>wrote: > Is it (k)th smallest element (distict integers) > or the element at position k, when both are merged? > > 11111111111111113333333345555555555555556666666666666677799999999999999999999 > --> Is 3rd smallest element '1' or '4' > > If four, I am not able to think of a log complexity. Can u post your > recursive solution only if u meant '4' in above case. > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Algorithm Geeks" group. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msg/algogeeks/-/Aq8q9OwfcaEJ. > > 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.