How does a recursive code determine if palindrome work? - c

I have a problem question and a snippet code below. The snippet is filled already because I found out the solution but I do not understand why it is like that. Could you help me explain how the codes work?
Problem: Ten tiles each have strings of in between 1 and 4 letters on them (hardcoded in the code below). The goal of this problem is to complete the code below so it counts the number of different orders in which all of the tiles can be placed such that the string they form creates a palindrome (a word that reads the same forwards and backwards). All of main, as well as the function eval which determines if a particular ordering of the tiles forms a palindrome. You may call this function in the function go. Complete the recursive function (named go) to complete the solution.
Snippet code:
#include <stdio.h>
#include <string.h>
#define N 10
#define MAXLEN 5
int go(int perm[], int used[], int k, char tiles[N][MAXLEN]);
int eval(int perm[], char tiles[N][MAXLEN]);
char MYTILES[N][MAXLEN] = {
"at", "ta", "g", "cc", "ccac", "ca", "cc", "gag", "cga", "gc"
};
int
main(void)
{
int perm[N];
int used[N];
for (int i = 0; i < N; i++)
used[i] = 0;
int res = go(perm, used, 0, MYTILES);
printf("Number of tile orderings that create palindromes is %d\n", res);
return 0;
}
int
go(int perm[], int used[], int k, char tiles[N][MAXLEN])
{
if (k == N)
return eval(perm, tiles);
int res = 0;
for (int i = 0; i < N; i++) {
if (used[i])
continue;
used[i] = 1;
perm[k] = i;
res += go(perm, used, k + 1, tiles);
used[i] = 0;
}
return res;
}
int
eval(int perm[], char tiles[N][MAXLEN])
{
char tmp[N * MAXLEN];
int idx = 0;
for (int i = 0; i < N; i++) {
int len = strlen(tiles[perm[i]]);
for (int j = 0; j < len; j++)
tmp[idx++] = tiles[perm[i]][j];
}
tmp[idx] = '\0';
for (int i = 0; i < idx / 2; i++)
if (tmp[i] != tmp[idx - 1 - i])
return 0;
return 1;
}
Thank you. I appreciate all help!!

To understand this code, add the following line to the start of eval():
for( int j = 0; j < N; j++ ) printf( "%d ", perm[j] ); putchar('\n');
The for() loop in go() causes a recursion that is 10 levels deep, ultimately generating 10! (~3.6 million) permutations of the 10 indices from 0 to 9. In sequence, each of those permutations is used to concatenate the 'tokens' (the short ACTG variations) into a single string that is then tested for being palindromic by `eval()'
This is called a "brute force" search through the possibility space.
Below I've revised the code to be slightly more compact, adding two "printf debugging" lines (marked "/**/") that report what the program is doing. You'll need some patience if you wish to watch millions of permutations of 0 to 9 scroll by, or simply comment out that line and recompile. I also shuffled things around and made the two interesting arrays global instead of "whacking the stack" by passing them up/down the recursion. Less code is better. This program is "single purpose". The clarity gained justifies using global variables in this instance, imho.
More interesting is the additional puts() line that reports the palindromic sequences.
#include <stdio.h>
#include <string.h>
#define N 10
#define MAXLEN 5
char MYTILES[N][MAXLEN] = { "AT","TA","G","CC","CCAC","CA","CC","GAG","CGA","GC" };
int perm[N], used[N] = { 0 };
int go( int k ) {
if (k == N) {
// At extent of recursion here.
/**/ for( int j = 0; j < k; j++ ) printf( "%d ", perm[j] ); putchar('\n');
// Make a string in this sequence
char tmp[N*MAXLEN] = {0};
for( int i = 0; i < N; i++ )
strcat( tmp, MYTILES[ perm[ i ] ] );
// Test string for being palidromic
for( int l = 0, r = strlen( tmp ) - 1; l <= r; l++, r-- )
if( tmp[l] != tmp[r] )
return 0; // Not palidrome
/**/ puts( tmp );
return 1; // Is palidrome
}
// recursively generate permutations here
int res = 0;
for( int i = 0; i < N; i++ )
if( !used[i] ) {
used[i] = 1;
perm[k] = i;
res += go( k+1 );
used[i] = 0;
}
return res;
}
int main( void ) {
printf( "Palindromic tile orderings: %d\n", go( 0 ) );
return 0;
}
An immediate 'speed-up' would be to test that the first letter of the 0th string to be permuted matches the last letter of the 9th string... Don't bother concatenating if a palindrome is impossible from the get-go. Other optimisations are left as an exercise for the reader...
BTW: It's okay to make a copy of code and add your own print statements so that the program reports what it is doing when... Or, you could single-step through a debugger...
UPDATE
Having added a preliminary generation of a 10x10 matrix to 'gate' the workload of generating strings to be checked as palindromic, with the 10 OP supplied strings, it turns out that 72% of those operations were doomed to fail from the start. Of the 3.6 million "brute force" attempts, a quick reference to this pre-generated matrix prevented about 2.6 million of them.
It's worthwhile trying to make code efficient.
UPDATE #2:
Bothered that there was still a lot of 'fat' in the execution after trying to improve on the "brute force" in a simple way, I've redone some of the code.
Using a few extra global variables (the state of processing), the following now does some "preparation" in main(), then enters the recursion. In this version, once the string being assembled from fragments is over half complete (in length), it is checked from the "middle out" if it qualifies as being palindromic. If so, each appended fragment causes a re-test. If the string would never become a palindrome, the recursion 'backs-up' and tries another 'flavour' of permutation. This trims the possibility space immensely (and really speeds up the execution.)
char *Tiles[] = { "AT","TA","G","CC","CCAC","CA","CC","GAG","CGA","GC" };
const int nTiles = sizeof Tiles/sizeof Tiles[0];
int used[ nTiles ];
char buildBuf[ 1024 ], *cntrL, *cntrR; // A big buffer and 2 pointers.
int fullLen;
int cntTested, goCalls; // some counters to report iterations
uint32_t factorial( uint32_t n ) { // calc n! (max 12! to fit uint32_t)
uint32_t f = 1;
while( n ) f *= n--;
return f;
}
int hope() { // center outward testing for palindromic characteristics
int i;
for( i = 0; cntrL[ 0 - i ] == cntrR[ 0 + i ]; i++ ) ; // looping
return cntrR[ 0 + i ] == '\0';
}
int go( int k ) {
goCalls++;
if( k == nTiles ) { // at full extent of recursion here
// test string being palindromic (from ends toward middle for fun)
cntTested++;
for( int l = 0, r = fullLen - 1; l <= r; l++, r-- )
if( buildBuf[l] != buildBuf[r] )
return 0; // Not palindrome
/**/ puts( buildBuf );
return 1; // Is palindrome
}
// recursively generate permutations here
// instead of building from sequence of indices
// this builds the (global) sequence string right here
int res = 0;
char *at = buildBuf + strlen( buildBuf );
for( int i = 0; i < nTiles; i++ )
if( !used[i] ) {
strcpy( at, Tiles[ i ] );
// keep recursing until > half assembled and hope persists
if( at < cntrL || hope() ) {
used[i] = 1;
res += go( k+1 ); // go 'deeper' in the recursion
used[i] = 0;
}
}
return res;
}
int main( void ) {
for( int i = 0; i < nTiles; i++ )
fullLen += strlen( Tiles[i] );
if( fullLen % 2 == 0 ) // even count
cntrR = (cntrL = buildBuf + fullLen/2 - 1) + 1; // 24 ==> 0-11 & 12->23
else
cntrR = cntrL = buildBuf + fullLen/2; // 25 ==> 0-12 & 12->24
printf( "Palindromic tile orderings: %d\n", go( 0 ) );
printf( "Potential: %d\n", factorial( nTiles ) );
printf( "Calls to go(): %d\n", goCalls );
printf( "Actual: %d\n", cntTested );
return 0;
}
ATCCACGAGCCGCCGAGCACCTA
ATCCACGAGCCGCCGAGCACCTA
ATCCACGCCGAGAGCCGCACCTA
ATCCACGCCGAGAGCCGCACCTA
ATCACCGAGCCGCCGAGCCACTA
ATCACCGCCGAGAGCCGCCACTA
ATCACCGAGCCGCCGAGCCACTA
ATCACCGCCGAGAGCCGCCACTA
TACCACGAGCCGCCGAGCACCAT
TACCACGAGCCGCCGAGCACCAT
TACCACGCCGAGAGCCGCACCAT
TACCACGCCGAGAGCCGCACCAT
TACACCGAGCCGCCGAGCCACAT
TACACCGCCGAGAGCCGCCACAT
TACACCGAGCCGCCGAGCCACAT
TACACCGCCGAGAGCCGCCACAT
CCACATGAGCCGCCGAGTACACC
CCACATGAGCCGCCGAGTACACC
CCACATGCCGAGAGCCGTACACC
CCACATGCCGAGAGCCGTACACC
CCACTAGAGCCGCCGAGATCACC
CCACTAGAGCCGCCGAGATCACC
CCACTAGCCGAGAGCCGATCACC
CCACTAGCCGAGAGCCGATCACC
CACCATGAGCCGCCGAGTACCAC
CACCATGCCGAGAGCCGTACCAC
CACCTAGAGCCGCCGAGATCCAC
CACCTAGCCGAGAGCCGATCCAC
CACCATGAGCCGCCGAGTACCAC
CACCATGCCGAGAGCCGTACCAC
CACCTAGAGCCGCCGAGATCCAC
CACCTAGCCGAGAGCCGATCCAC
Palindromic tile orderings: 32
Potential: 3628800
Calls to go(): 96712
Actual: 32
UPDATE #3 (having fun)
When there's too much code, and an inefficient algorithm, it's easy to get lost and struggle to work out what is happening.
Below produces exactly the same results as above, but shaves a few more operations from the execution. In short, go() is called recursively until at least 1/2 of the candidate string has been built-up. At that point, hope() is asked to evaluate the string "from the middle, out." As long as the conditions of being palindromic (from the centre, outward) are being met, that evaluation is repeated as the string grows (via recursion) toward its fullest extent. It is the "bailing-out early" that makes this version far more efficient than the OP version.
One further 'refinement' is that the bottom of the recursion is found without an extra call to \0. Once one has the concepts of recursion and permutation, this should all be straight forward...
char *Tiles[] = { "AT", "TA", "G", "CC", "CCAC", "CA", "CC", "GAG", "CGA", "GC" };
const int nTiles = sizeof Tiles/sizeof Tiles[0];
int used[ nTiles ];
char out[ 1024 ], *cntrL, *cntrR;
int hope() { // center outward testing for palidromic characteristics
char *pL = cntrL, *pR = cntrR;
while( *pL == *pR ) pL--, pR++;
return *pR == '\0';
}
int go( int k ) {
int res = 0;
char *at = out + strlen( out );
for( size_t i = 0; i < nTiles; i++ )
if( !used[i] ) {
strcpy( at, Tiles[ i ] );
if( at >= cntrL && !hope() ) // abandon this string?
continue;
if( k+1 == nTiles ) { // At extent of recursion here.
puts( out );
return 1;
}
used[i] = 1, res += go( k+1 ), used[i] = 0;
}
return res;
}
int main( void ) {
int need = 0;
for( size_t i = 0; i < nTiles; i++ )
need += strlen( Tiles[ i ] );
cntrL = cntrR = out + need/2; // odd eg: 25 ==> 0-12 & 12->24
cntrL -= (need % 2 == 0 ); // but, if even eg: 24 ==> 0-11 & 12->23
printf( "Palindromic tile orderings: %d\n", go( 0 ) );
return 0;
}

Related

Checking whether a string consists of two repetitions

I am writing a function that returns 1 if a string consists of two repetitions, 0 otherwise.
Example: If the string is "hellohello", the function will return 1 because the string consists of the same two words "hello" and "hello".
The first test I did was to use a nested for loop but after a bit of reasoning I thought that the idea is wrong and is not the right way to solve, here is the last function I wrote.
It is not correct, even if the string consists of two repetitions, it returns 0.
Also, I know this problem could be handled differently with a while loop following another algorithm, but I was wondering if it could be done with the for as well.
My idea would be to divide the string in half and check it character by character.
This is the last function I tried:
int doubleString(char *s){
int true=1;
char strNew[50];
for(int i=0;i<strlen(s)/2;i++){
strNew[i]=s[i];
}
for(int j=strlen(s)/2;j<strlen(s);j++){
if(!(strNew[j]==s[j])){
true=0;
}
}
return true;
}
The problem in your function is with the comparison in the second loop: you are using the j variable as an index for both the second half of the given string and for the index in the copied first half of that string. However, for that copied string, you need the indexes to start from zero – so you need to subtract the s_length/2 value from j when accessing its individual characters.
Also, it is better to use the size_t type when looping through strings and comparing to the results of functions like strlen (which return that type). You can also improve your code by saving the strlen(s)/2 value, so it isn't computed on each loop. You can also dispense with your local true variable, returning 0 as soon as you find a mismatch, or 1 if the second loop completes without finding such a mismatch:
int doubleString(char* s)
{
char strNew[50] = { 0, };
size_t full_len = strlen(s);
size_t half_len = full_len / 2;
for (size_t i = 0; i < half_len; i++) {
strNew[i] = s[i];
}
for (size_t j = half_len; j < full_len; j++) {
if (strNew[j - half_len] != s[j]) { // x != y is clearer than !(x == y)
return 0;
}
}
return 1;
}
In fact, once you have appreciated why you need to subtract that "half length" from the j index of strNew, you can remove the need for that temporary copy completely and just use the modified j as an index into the original string:
int doubleString(char* s)
{
size_t full_len = strlen(s);
size_t half_len = full_len / 2;
for (size_t j = half_len; j < full_len; j++) {
if (s[j - half_len] != s[j]) { // x != y is clearer than !(x == y)
return 0;
}
}
return 1;
}
This loop
for(int j=strlen(s)/2;j<strlen(s);j++){
if(!(strNew[j]==s[j])){
true=0;
}
}
is incorrect. The index in the array strNew shall start from 0 instead of the value of the expression strlen( s ) / 2.
But in any case your approach is incorrect because at least you are using an intermediate array with the magic number 50. The user can pass to the function a string of any length.
char strNew[50];
The function can look much simpler.
For example
int doubleString( const char *s )
{
int double_string = 0;
size_t n = 0;
if ( ( double_string = *s != '\0' && ( n = strlen( s ) ) % 2 == 0 ) )
{
double_string = memcmp( s, s + n / 2, n / 2 ) == 0;
}
return double_string;
}
That is the function at first checks that the passed string is not empty and its length is an even number. If so then the function compares two halves of the string.
Here is a demonstration program.
#include <stdio.h>
#include <string.h>
int doubleString( const char *s )
{
int double_string = 0;
size_t n = 0;
if (( double_string = *s != '\0' && ( n = strlen( s ) ) % 2 == 0 ))
{
double_string = memcmp( s, s + n / 2, n / 2 ) == 0;
}
return double_string;
}
int main( void )
{
printf( "doubleString( \"\" ) = %d\n", doubleString( "" ) );
printf( "doubleString( \"HelloHello\" ) = %d\n", doubleString( "HelloHello" ) );
printf( "doubleString( \"Hello Hello\" ) = %d\n", doubleString( "Hello Hello" ) );
}
The program output is
doubleString( "" ) = 0
doubleString( "HelloHello" ) = 1
doubleString( "Hello Hello" ) = 0
Pay attention to that the function parameter should have the qualifier const because the passed string is not changed within the function. And you will be able to call the function with constant arrays without the need to defined one more function for constant character arrays.
it's better to do it with a while loop since you don't always have to iterate through all the elements of the string but since you want the for loop version here it is (C++ version):
int doubleString(string s){
int s_length = s.length();
if(s_length%2 != 0) {
return 0;
}
for (int i = 0; i < s_length/2; i++) {
if (s[i] != s[s_length/2 + i]){
return 0;
}
}
return 1;
}

Codility Test - Better Answer?

Had a Codility test yeterday and did not do great. The first question was pretty easy, but I ran out of time on the second question. Was curious if I was at least headed down the right path toward an efficient solution.
The task says you're given a char array A of up to N elements. ALL of the elements are upper case letters. The task is to figure out how many times a particular word can be spelled from the letters in the array, keeping in mind a set of the letters in this word get "consumed" each time you find an instance of the word. The letters DON'T have to appear in order. Lets say the word is "MOON". So if you have an array filled with {F, N, D, M, O, R, O}, you can spell "MOON" once. In an array like {R, N, O, T ,O, M, O, D, W, N, O, M} you can spell "MOON" twice.
I wrote in C, and my strategy was pretty simple: figure out which letter in "MOON" appeared the least, as that would be limiting factor. I used a for loop to scan the array for M, O and N. Used a switch inside the for loop with a counter for each of these three letters. When complete, first realize that "MOON" requires TWO "Os", so divide the total number of "Os" found by 2. Then, compare the totals for each of the three letters, seeing which one was the smallest. That should be the "limiting factor" in how many times I can spell the word.
So roughly:
int solution(int *A)
{
int Mcnt = 0, Ocnt = 0, Ncnt = 0;
int N = sizeof(A)/sizeof(char);
int lowestIter = N;
int cntArr[];
for(int x = 0; int < N; x++0)
{
switch A[x]
{
case 'M':
Mcnt++;
break;
//Etc. for O and N
default:
break;
}
}
Ocnt = Ocnt / 2; //Divide by 2 since O gets used twice in "MOON"
//Stick the count values in another array to check for smallest
CntArr[0] = Mcnt;
CntArr[1] = Ocnt;
CntArr[2] = Ncnt;
for (y = 0; y < 3; y++)
{
if (CntArr[y] < lowestIter)
{
lowestIter = CntArr[y];
}
}
return lowestIter;
}
I think this results in O(n), but not positive. Am I way off?
I found almost the same question on LeetCode (the word was "balloon", all in lowercase). Cleaned up a couple of syntax errors, and submitted it: 0mS execution time, faster than 100% of C submissions. A bit annoyed that it seems the company that was interviewing me only looked at my score and didn't notice I was a few typos away from a working, efficient solution...
Anyway, here it is:
int maxNumberOfBalloons(char * text){
int Bcnt = 0, Ocnt = 0, Ncnt = 0, Acnt = 0, Lcnt = 0;
int len = strlen(text);
int lowestIter = len;
int CntArr[5];
for(int x = 0; x < len; x++)
{
switch(text[x])
{
case 'b':
Bcnt++;
break;
case 'a':
Acnt++;
break;
case 'l':
Lcnt++;
break;
case 'o':
Ocnt++;
break;
case 'n':
Ncnt++;
break;
default:
break;
}
}
Ocnt = Ocnt / 2; //Divide by 2 since O gets used twice
Lcnt = Lcnt / 2;
//Stick the count values in another array to check for smallest
CntArr[0] = Bcnt;
CntArr[1] = Acnt;
CntArr[2] = Lcnt;
CntArr[3] = Ocnt;
CntArr[4] = Ncnt;
for (int y = 0; y < 5; y++)
{
if (CntArr[y] < lowestIter)
{
lowestIter = CntArr[y];
}
}
return lowestIter;
}
The following proposed code:
cleanly compiles (but due to no main() function, does not link)
performs the desired functionality for any length of input values
lets the caller determine the two arrays rather than being limited just moon
regarding: for( size_t x = 0; availableChars[x]; x++ ) the availableChars[x] will cause the loop to exit when the NUL termination char is encountered.
and now, the proposed code:
#include <string.h>
#include <ctype.h>
#define A_Z_LEN 26
int solution( size_t availableLen, char availableChars[ availableLen ], size_t targetLen, char target[ targetLen ] )
{
char localTarget[ targetLen ];
int retValue = 0;
char alphabetCounts[ A_Z_LEN ] = {'\0'};
// init counts
for( size_t x = 0; availableChars[x]; x++ )
{
alphabetCounts[ tolower( availableChars[x]) ]++;
}
while( 1 )
{
for ( size_t y = 0; y < targetLen; y++)
{
localTarget[y] = (char)tolower( target[y] );
if ( alphabetCounts[ localTarget[y] - 'a' ] > 0 )
{
alphabetCounts[ tolower( target[ y ] ) - 'a' ]--;
}
else
{
return retValue;
}
}
retValue++;
}
return retValue;
}

why time limit exceeded in uva 100 problem

I don't know what is the matter.. it works great when I run on my pc but when I submit in uva OJ it says time limit exceeded please help
Here is my solution:
#include <stdio.h>
int main()
{
long int i,j,c,t,k,u,r;
scanf("%d %d",&i,&j);
printf("%d %d",i,j);
r = 0;
if(i>j){
t = i;
i = j;
j = t;
}
for(k = i; k<=j;k++){
c = 1;
u = k;
while(u>1){
if(u%2 == 0)
u = u/2;
else
u = 3*u+1;
c++;
if(c>=r)
r = c;
}
}
printf (" %d",r);
return 0;
}
The following code, on my ubuntu Linux 14.04 takes about 1 second to run, when invoked via:
./untitled > outfile.txt
so perhaps this could be useful.
Note: this will have to be modified significantly for the euler problem
Note: the problem says "UNDER" 1 million, but this code starts at 1 million rather than starting at 999999
// Longest Collatz sequence
// Problem 14
/*
* criteria
* The following iterative sequence is defined for the set of positive integers:
* n → n/2 (n is even)
* n → 3n + 1 (n is odd)
*
* example:
* Using the rule above and starting with 13, we generate the following sequence:
* 13 → 40 → 20 → 10 → 5 → 16 → 8 → 4 → 2 → 1
* It can be seen that this sequence (starting at 13 and finishing at 1) contains 10 terms.
* Although it has not been proved yet (Collatz Problem),
* it is thought that all starting numbers finish at 1.
*
* the question:
* Which starting number, under one million, produces the longest chain?
*
* Note:
* Once the chain starts the terms are allowed to go above one million.
*/
#include <stdio.h>
// prototypes
void fastWrite( size_t a );
int main( void )
{
#define MAX_START_VALUE (1000000)
size_t LongestChain = 0;
size_t LongestStartValue = 0;
for( size_t i=MAX_START_VALUE; i; i--)
{
size_t chainLength = 0;
size_t result = i;
// for debug
char buffer[] = "current start value:";
for( size_t j=0; buffer[j]; j++) putchar_unlocked( buffer[j] );
putchar_unlocked( ' ');
fastWrite( i );
// end debug
while( result != 1 )
{
chainLength++;
if( result&1 )
{ // then odd
result = 3*result +1;
}
else
{ // else even
result >>= 1;
}
// for debug
//./fastWrite( result );
// end debug
}
chainLength++;
// for debug
char buffer2[] = "chain length: ";
for( size_t k=0; buffer2[k]; k++) putchar_unlocked( buffer2[k] );
fastWrite( chainLength );
putchar_unlocked( '\n' );
// end debug
if ( chainLength > LongestChain )
{
LongestChain = chainLength;
LongestStartValue = i;
}
}
fastWrite( LongestStartValue );
putchar_unlocked('\n');
//putchar_unlocked('\n');
} // end function: main
inline void fastWrite(size_t a)
{
char snum[20];
//printf( "%s, %lu\n", __func__, a );
int i=0;
do
{
// 48 is numeric character 0
snum[i++] = (char)((a%10)+(size_t)48);
a=a/10;
}while(a>0);
i=i-1; // correction for overincrement from prior 'while' loop
while(i>=0)
{
putchar_unlocked(snum[i--]);
}
putchar_unlocked('\n');
} // end function: fastWrite
Just to be helpful with the time taken:
the following are good ways to speed up the I/O
#include <stdio.h>
void fastRead( size_t *a );
void fastWrite( size_t a );
inline void fastRead(size_t *a)
{
int c=0;
// note: 32 is space character
while (c<33) c=getchar_unlocked();
// initialize result value
*a=0;
// punctuation parens, etc are show stoppers
while (c>47 && c<58)
{
*a = (*a)*10 + (size_t)(c-48);
c=getchar_unlocked();
}
//printf( "%s, value: %lu\n", __func__, *a );
} // end function: fastRead
inline void fastWrite(size_t a)
{
char snum[20];
//printf( "%s, %lu\n", __func__, a );
int i=0;
do
{
// 48 is numeric character 0
snum[i++] = (char)((a%10)+(size_t)48);
a=a/10;
}while(a>0);
i=i-1; // correction for overincrement from prior 'while' loop
while(i>=0)
{
putchar_unlocked(snum[i--]);
}
putchar_unlocked('\n');
} // end function: fastWrite
and output characters via:
putchar_unlocked( char );
and always have a final, at end of each test case, the following line:
putchar_unlocked( '\n' );
to input a string of characters, call the following in a loop until a space or newline is encountered
char = getchar_unlocked()
and a final hint: most such problems are easily solved using size_t numeric values, which allows values to 4gig or more. (same as a unsigned long int)
For the current problem. as soon as a chain is calculated, save the chain, perhaps in an array, so you do not have to calculate it again.
Your could pre-calculate the first 'x' chains, say the first 10 for instance, to help with shortening the execution time.

Array rotation to the left (recursive)

Disclaimer: it is an exercise, but it's not homework.
Now, here we go. The exercise asks for the rotation of a generic array to the left, putting the first element in the last position, and doing it so with recursion. My thoughts:
Here's the right rotation one I've written:
void moveArrayRight (int array[], int dim){
if(dim!=1){
int holder;
holder = array[dim-1];
array[dim-1]=array[dim-2];
array[dim-2]=holder;
moveArrayRight(array, dim-1);
}
}
The thing is: I cannot (I think) use the same technique for the left one. I could add another parameter (technically, I could use whatever I want to), but I deeply dislike it. If possible, I would like to retain only two parameters. I also thought of doing something like using the last element of the array to store what is going to be in the next cell, but I don't know how to implement it mainly for a reason: I have no idea how to retain the original dimension of the array.
Any thoughts, hints or something like that?
void rotate_left( int a[], size_t n )
{
if ( n > 1 )
{
int tmp = a[0];
a[0] = a[1];
a[1] = tmp;
rotate_left( a + 1, n - 1 );
}
}
Here is an example of the function usage
#include <stdio.h>
void rotate_left( int a[], size_t n )
{
if ( n > 1 )
{
int tmp = a[0];
a[0] = a[1];
a[1] = tmp;
rotate_left( a + 1, n - 1 );
}
}
int main( void )
{
int a[] = { 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 };
for ( size_t i = 0; i < sizeof( a ) / sizeof( *a ); i++ ) printf( "%d ", a[i] );
puts( "" );
rotate_left( a, 5 );
for ( size_t i = 0; i < sizeof( a ) / sizeof( *a ); i++ ) printf( "%d ", a[i] );
puts( "" );
return 0;
}
The output is
1 2 3 4 5
2 3 4 5 1
To use recursion effectively you would split the work, for example in the middle, instead of just slicing off one item at a time. Something like:
function shiftLeft(arr, start, len, in) {
var result;
if (len == 1) {
result = arr[start];
arr[start] = in;
} else {
var half = Math.floor(len / 2);
in = shiftLeft(arr, start + half, len - half, in);
result = shiftLeft(arr, start, half, in);
}
return result;
}
Usage:
shiftLeft(arr, 0, arr.length, arr[0]);
(Disclaimer: The code is not tested and might have bugs, I wrote this on my phone.)

Finding unique elements in an string array in C

C bothers me with its handling of strings. I have a pseudocode like this in my mind:
char *data[20];
char *tmp; int i,j;
for(i=0;i<20;i++) {
tmp = data[i];
for(j=1;j<20;j++)
{
if(strcmp(tmp,data[j]))
//then except the uniqueness, store them in elsewhere
}
}
But when i coded this the results were bad.(I handled all the memory stuff,little things etc.) The problem is in the second loop obviously :D. But i cannot think any solution. How do i find unique strings in an array.
Example input : abc def abe abc def deg entered
unique ones : abc def abe deg should be found.
You could use qsort to force the duplicates next to each other. Once sorted, you only need to compare adjacent entries to find duplicates. The result is O(N log N) rather than (I think) O(N^2).
Here is the 15 minute lunchtime version with no error checking:
typedef struct {
int origpos;
char *value;
} SORT;
int qcmp(const void *x, const void *y) {
int res = strcmp( ((SORT*)x)->value, ((SORT*)y)->value );
if ( res != 0 )
return res;
else
// they are equal - use original position as tie breaker
return ( ((SORT*)x)->origpos - ((SORT*)y)->origpos );
}
int main( int argc, char* argv[] )
{
SORT *sorted;
char **orig;
int i;
int num = argc - 1;
orig = malloc( sizeof( char* ) * ( num ));
sorted = malloc( sizeof( SORT ) * ( num ));
for ( i = 0; i < num; i++ ) {
orig[i] = argv[i + 1];
sorted[i].value = argv[i + 1];
sorted[i].origpos = i;
}
qsort( sorted, num, sizeof( SORT ), qcmp );
// remove the dups (sorting left relative position same for dups)
for ( i = 0; i < num - 1; i++ ) {
if ( !strcmp( sorted[i].value, sorted[i+1].value ))
// clear the duplicate entry however you see fit
orig[sorted[i+1].origpos] = NULL; // or free it if dynamic mem
}
// print them without dups in original order
for ( i = 0; i < num; i++ )
if ( orig[i] )
printf( "%s ", orig[i] );
free( orig );
free( sorted );
}
char *data[20];
int i, j, n, unique[20];
n = 0;
for (i = 0; i < 20; ++i)
{
for (j = 0; j < n; ++j)
{
if (!strcmp(data[i], data[unique[j]]))
break;
}
if (j == n)
unique[n++] = i;
}
The indexes of the first occurrence of each unique string should be in unique[0..n-1] if I did that right.
Why are you starting second loop from 1?
You should start it from
i+1. i.e.
for(j=i+1;j<20;j++)
Like if the list is
abc
def
abc
abc
lop
then
when i==4
tmp="lop"
but then the second loop starts which is from 1 to 19. This means it will get a value of 4 too at one stage, and then
data[4], which is "lop", will be same as tmp. So although "lop" is unique but it will be flagged as repeated.
Hope it was helpful.
Think a bit more about your problem -- what you really want to do is look at the PREVIOUS strings to see if you've already seen it. So, for each string n, compare it to strings 0 through n-1.
print element 0 (it is unique)
for i = 1 to n
unique = 1
for j = 0 to i-1 (compare this element to the ones preceding it)
if element[i] == element[j]
unique = 0
break from loop
if unique, print element i
Might it be that your test is if (strcmp (this, that)) which will succeed if the two are different? !strcmp is probably what you want there.

Resources