using array, we can do in O(logn) always as it is ordered. If all values
hash to same bucket in case of hashtable, it would be O(n) worse case
On Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 12:03 AM, rajeev bharshetty rajeevr...@gmail.comwrote:
Hash Table with Bucket , made of linked list .
At most if all n values
In the question it is specified that the data structure should have a worst
case time complexity of O(N)
--
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
Which of the following data structure do better job (has lesser time
complexity) at searching elements that has a worst-case time
complexity of O(n)? Do not account for the cost of building the Data
structure in searching cost.
a) Linked list with element sorted by value
b) Binary tree with no
Hash Table with Bucket , made of linked list .
At most if all n values hash to same bucket then at worst case we must
traverse n linked list nodes to find the element.
Hope it is clear
On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 11:59 PM, Reynald reynaldsus...@gmail.com wrote:
Which of the following data
I think Ordered array Search time = O(logn) whereas for bucket
complexity=O(sqrt(n)) as it is unordered.
--
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
d) Hast table with bucket, made up of linked list, where linked list
have no ordering.
--
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
