[algogeeks] Re: Alternative merge

2010-08-22 Thread Gene
Sorry. Let's try again: http://groups.google.com/group/algogeeks/browse_thread/thread/f56bac6fc244a49b/f0214957224b3010 On Aug 22, 4:27 am, "R.ARAVINDH" wrote: > link nt working...so can anyone explain fr new users?? > > On Aug 16, 6:52 pm, Minotauraus wrote: > > > > > Please check link. > >

[algogeeks] Re: Alternative merge

2010-08-22 Thread R.ARAVINDH
link nt working...so can anyone explain fr new users?? On Aug 16, 6:52 pm, Minotauraus wrote: > Please check link. > > On Aug 15, 8:25 pm, Gene wrote: > > > > >http://groups.google.com/group/algogeeks/browse_thread/thread/f56bac6... > > > The best solution given there is O(n) with only constant

[algogeeks] Re: Alternative merge

2010-08-16 Thread Minotauraus
Please check link. On Aug 15, 8:25 pm, Gene wrote: > http://groups.google.com/group/algogeeks/browse_thread/thread/f56bac6... > > The best solution given there is O(n) with only constant additional > storage. > > On Aug 15, 1:51 pm, Debajyoti Sarma wrote: > > > > > > > > > so what was the optima

[algogeeks] Re: Alternative merge

2010-08-15 Thread Gene
http://groups.google.com/group/algogeeks/browse_thread/thread/f56bac6... The best solution given there is O(n) with only constant additional storage. On Aug 15, 1:51 pm, Debajyoti Sarma wrote: > so what was the optimal solution found in the previous discussion?? give a > link > I don't remember

[algogeeks] Re: Alternative merge

2010-08-15 Thread Gene
http://groups.google.com/group/algogeeks/browse_thread/thread/f56bac6fc244a49b/f0214957224b3010 The solution given there is O(n) for certain sizes of input and O(n log n) for general values of n. On Aug 15, 1:51 pm, Debajyoti Sarma wrote: > so what was the optimal solution found in the previou

Re: [algogeeks] Re: Alternative merge

2010-08-15 Thread Debajyoti Sarma
so what was the optimal solution found in the previous discussion?? give a link I don't remember the name of the thread...so only i posted this. On 8/15/10, Gene wrote: > In fact this solution was suggested (without code) in the original > discussion. > > It's O(n^2). > > You're only re-ordering

[algogeeks] Re: Alternative merge

2010-08-15 Thread Gene
In fact this solution was suggested (without code) in the original discussion. It's O(n^2). You're only re-ordering a constant number (4) of elements in each recursive pass, and each pass requires O(n) time to execute. You also need to assume your compiler will remove the tail recursion. Otherwi