I know the naive method. It's very straight. Just maintain an index
array which records the
index of the books. whenever one book is removed then update all
elements in the index array after its index.
It runs O (M N). I'd like to know is there any efficent data structure
to speedup it?
Thanks.
He has lost many books, since many of his friends borrow his books and
never bother to return them. He does not want to lose any more books
and has decided to keep a record of all books that he lends to his
friends. To make the task of borrowing a book a little difficult, he
has given the followin
I think Floyd Bellman method can solve it. We can get any pair
vertex distance and find the largest one. That's the diameter of a
graph. But this method is not DP but iterative approach.
On Sep 1, 2:55 pm, mirchi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> can anyone explain me how to find the diameter of a g
To Adak,
I must clarify the problem. When I mean consecutive numbers, I am not
saying the values are consecutive, but the positions of the numbers.
So in sequence of number {2, 4, 5, 7, 1, 23, 41, 12}, {5, 7, 1} is a
segment of consecutive numbers. But {2, 5, 7} is not because 4 is
missed between
Thanks,
This one is helpgul
On Sep 3, 7:36 am, rlacsd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> u can download them from my site asees.275mb.com
>
> On Sep 1, 8:40 pm, rahul <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>
> > can neone give me link to cormen solutions pls
> > its very urgent
> > pls give me link at [EMAIL
Well, now you've gone and given me Sicker shock! :)
Dilly of a problem, I must say!!
I can't offer you a possible solution, but I'm curious what algorithms
you've tried for this problem, and what was the resulting
performance?
I was thinking, something like:
Scan the numbers, putting all sequ
I think this should help you:
Suppose, M[i,j,a] represents the number of ways to parenthesize the
sub-array from i to j so as to produce the result a.
Similarly, M[i,j,b] and M[i,j,c] . I think you can implement this using
three dimensional array with the third dimension
of constant size i.e 3, in
Counting sort doesn't work that way. The algo inherently requires O(N)
storage for the counting array which effectively makes the algorithm running
time O(N). If the range of values were known before hand, then the counting
array would be of fixed size thus catering to what you need. But if the
ran
