Greater than God Riddle 18 MAY PUZZLE
*What is Greater than God, worse than evil, the poor have it, the rich
require it, and if you eat it, you die?*
*
*
*Update Your Answers at* : Click
Herehttp://dailybrainteaser.blogspot.com/2011/05/greater-than-god-riddle-18-may.html?lavesh=lavesh
*NOTHING*.
*Greater than GOD - NOTHING*
*Worse than EVIL - NOTHING*
*Poor have it and rich want it - NOTHING*
*if you eat it, you die - NOTHING
*
On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 12:35 PM, Lavesh Rawat lavesh.ra...@gmail.comwrote:
Greater than God Riddle 18 MAY PUZZLE
*What is Greater than God,
@kunal patil
your soln does not work for
5 3 4 5 3 3
On Tue, May 17, 2011 at 9:57 PM, Kunal Patil kp101...@gmail.com wrote:
Ohh..If it is so...Sorry !![?] I understood it the different way...[?]
But if the question is as mentioned in your 2nd case then also I believe
there is O(n)
i dnt htink a o(n) soln exists for this problem.
On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 3:47 PM, amit kumar amitthecoo...@gmail.com wrote:
@kunal patil
your soln does not work for
5 3 4 5 3 3
On Tue, May 17, 2011 at 9:57 PM, Kunal Patil kp101...@gmail.com wrote:
Ohh..If it is so...Sorry !![?] I
@Amit: Ohh..Your test case is correct but not my solution..[?]
It only works if it is guaranteed that one end will be at the extreme of the
array ! (UseLess ! [?])
Sorry folks...
So can anybody prove that O(n) solution does not exist for this problem? [?]
--
You received this message because you
Hahaha...Nice answer Piyush !
On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 12:44 PM, Piyush Sinha ecstasy.piy...@gmail.comwrote:
*NOTHING*.
*Greater than GOD - NOTHING*
*Worse than EVIL - NOTHING*
*Poor have it and rich want it - NOTHING*
*if you eat it, you die - NOTHING
*
On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 12:35
nice answer...
--
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
I think it can be done in O(n) but the auxilliary space required will be
more... in the solution which i have got its in the order of 2n
On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 4:44 PM, Kunal Patil kp101...@gmail.com wrote:
@Amit: Ohh..Your test case is correct but not my solution..[?]
It only works if it is
Dave,
u said: a max-heap of the smallest
half of the elements
but if the number are randomply generated, then how will you get to know
whether a number belongs to smallest half OR lager half..
i didnt got it...
On Sat, May 14, 2011 at 9:10 PM, Dave dave_and_da...@juno.com wrote:
@Ashish:
@Saurabh: You look at the top elements in the two heaps. If the new
number is between the values of the top of the heaps, you add it to
the shorter of the two heaps, or to either heap if they are of equal
length. If the new number is larger than the min of the min-heap, you
add it to the min-heap.
Yes. Use a sieve.
Don
On May 17, 11:36 pm, wujin chen wujinchen...@gmail.com wrote:
@Daveļ¼ thanks for your reply.
i know that, i can only check from 6*n - 1 and 6*n + 1..
assume that, n=1 , and we begin from k=1667, the number needed to check
is 10001,10003
but to determin 10001 is
last night i was going through a similar kind of question and tried to
implement its algo in this question...If anyone finds any counter example
for it, please do comment..
Algo:-
*Let the array be A[].
We can keep two arrays B[] and C[] which will do the following work..
B[i] will store the
12 matches
Mail list logo
