> On 8 Jul 2019, at 05:51, ducasse <steph...@netcourrier.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>> On 7 Jul 2019, at 23:12, Smiljana Knezev <smilja.kne...@gmail.com
>> <mailto:smilja.kne...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>> Dear all,
>>
>> I've written about implementing binary search trees:
>> https://pharokeepers.github.io/pharo/2019/07/07/SmiljanaBinarySearchTreeinPharo.html
>>
>> <https://pharokeepers.github.io/pharo/2019/07/07/SmiljanaBinarySearchTreeinPharo.html>
>>
>> Feedback and opinions is always welcome :)
>
> pay attention to the formatting of your code.
> It makes is difficult to read (I do not know if this is wordpress effect or
> not).
>
> Once you have your tree implementation and tests I would really like to see
> if you can get another implementation and measure
> the impact of introducing a NullNode to remove all the isNil checks.
Also no need of extra parentheses between binary and keywords
depth:aNode
"Returns depth of a tree starting from the given node"
| leftDepth rightDepth |
leftDepth := -1.
aNode leftChild isNotNil
ifTrue: [ leftDepth := self depth: aNode leftChild ].
rightDepth := -1.
aNode rightChild isNotNil
ifTrue: [ rightDepth := self depth: aNode rightChild ].
( leftDepth > rightDepth )
ifTrue: [ ^ (1 + leftDepth) ]
ifFalse: [^ (1 + rightDepth ) ].
=>
leftDepth > rightDepth
ifTrue: [ ^ 1 + leftDepth ]
ifFalse: [^ 1 + rightDepth ].
And even better move out of block returns
when possible
^ leftDepth > rightDepth
ifTrue: [ 1 + leftDepth ]
ifFalse: [ 1 + rightDepth ].
With a nullNode the code should look like
depth:aNode
"Returns depth of a tree starting from the given node”
| leftDepth rightDepth |
leftDepth := self depth: aNode leftChild.
rightDepth := self depth: aNode rightChild.
^ leftDepth > rightDepth
ifTrue: [ 1 + leftDepth ]
ifFalse: [1 + rightDepth ]
>
>
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Smiljana Knezev
>
