Sort the elements initially and then you can logically solve it..i don kno the logic..but do mail me if you get a logic.pls help me i m beginnin to learn computers...
Sriram.N
On 5/19/06, Terry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi,If i have an array like {1,4, 10, 15 , 20 , 30 } of size n , now if iwa
I guess there is a slight mistake in the problem statement (or I am
misunderstanding it). How can the numbers lie between 1 and n. For
example, in the given array this would mean that all elements of the
array would be between 1 and 6 ??
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You
Sorry it shud be
int *pos = lower_bound(arr, arr + n, x );
x is the element you are searching for
-Dhyanesh
On 5/25/06, Dhyanesh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> If array is sorted just use STL
>
> int *pos = lower_bound(arr, arr + n ) ;
> print *pos;
>
> -Dhyanesh
>
> On 5/21/06, adak <[EMAIL PR
If array is sorted just use STL
int *pos = lower_bound(arr, arr + n ) ;
print *pos;
-Dhyanesh
On 5/21/06, adak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> This is a "normal" binary search. You just need to have it return the
> next lower number if a match is not found.
> And of course, get rid of the super
This is a "normal" binary search. You just need to have it return the
next lower number if a match is not found.
And of course, get rid of the superflous database records. sr[] is the
array of student records.
/* Number_Search uses a binary search, to search for a record's student
number. */
in
Terry wrote:
> If i have an array like {1,4, 10, 15 , 20 , 30 } of size n , now if i
> want to search for number
>
> 25 , i should get 20 , if i search for number 11 i hould get 10 , if i
> search for 4 i should get 4, if i search for a number and it doesn't
> exist i should get the lower number
Gene wrote:
> Terry wrote:
> > If i have an array like {1,4, 10, 15 , 20 , 30 } of size n , now if i
> > want to search for number
> >
> > 25 , i should get 20 , if i search for number 11 i hould get 10 , if i
> > search for 4 i should get 4, if i search for a number and it doesn't
> > exist i s
If we have a temporary variable then the O(n) solution works. On 5/19/06, Karthik Singaram L <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:Wont this algo have complexity O(n lgn) whereas a simple linear search would have O(n) and it would suffice for the problem
-- Manu Jose,mob :09844467453E-mail : [EMAIL PROTECT
Wont this algo have complexity O(n lgn) whereas a simple linear search would have O(n) and it would suffice for the problem
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Algorithm Geeks" group. To post to this grou
Quick sort technique. Element to search k.
Sort(A, s,e, Key)
{
pivot=A[s];
z= partition(A,s,e,pivot); //this
will split the array in to two parts in which one part contains
elemnents lesser than the pivot and
other greater than pivot. If (
If I understand the problem right, how about going over all the
elements of the array and store the largest number less that given
number in a temp variable? - o(n)
If we can preprocess the i/p - either sort, or store in a BST -
(excluding the preprocessing time), we can reach to the solution in
o
11 matches
Mail list logo
