You're right. I needed
tail = tail-next;
Before the closing } of the while loop.
Good catch.
Don
On Feb 23, 10:25 pm, Ashish Goel ashg...@gmail.com wrote:
tails needs to be updated in while loop also
Best Regards
Ashish Goel
Think positive and find fuel in failure
+919985813081
minute error : tail should be *tail while initializing instead of tail.
now it will work fine.
On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 7:55 PM, Don dondod...@gmail.com wrote:
You're right. I needed
tail = tail-next;
Before the closing } of the while loop.
Good catch.
Don
On Feb 23, 10:25 pm, Ashish
Ah, this reminds me of a beautiful thing that a fine gentleman CB
Falconer posted once in comp.programmer. It was so elegant that my
normally bad memory still remembers it after some years.
You can simplify the merge by using a dummy node for the head of the
merged list rather than just a
Why are you using tail recursion when an iterative approach would be
more efficient?
Don
On Feb 23, 3:41 am, rahul sharma rahul23111...@gmail.com wrote:
struct node* SortedMerge(struct node* a, struct node* b)
{
struct node* result = NULL;
/* Base cases */
if (a == NULL)
// Iterative merge
struct node* SortedMerge(struct node* a, struct node* b)
{
struct node* head, tail;
// Select first node
if (a-data b-data)
{
head = tail = a;
a = a-next;
}
else
{
head = tail = b;
b = b-next;
}
// Merge lists
while(a b)
{
if (a-data
Is the desired behavior to remove duplicates?
On Feb 23, 5:14 am, Karthikeyan V.B kartmu...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
this logic generates 10 10 20 25 .. and so on it doesn delete the
duplicates in the result list
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
tails needs to be updated in while loop also
Best Regards
Ashish Goel
Think positive and find fuel in failure
+919985813081
+919966006652
On Thu, Feb 23, 2012 at 8:19 PM, Don dondod...@gmail.com wrote:
// Iterative merge
struct node* SortedMerge(struct node* a, struct node* b)
{
struct
