Correct parenthesis - c

I came across this problem :
"It gives a string of round brackets. This string represents a parenthesis that is not necessarily correct. You have available the next move : you can change an open bracket '(' into a close brachet ')' or vice versa. You have to calculate the minimum number of moves needed to make the parenthesis to be correct."
e.g.
)())
answer : 1
First of all, I think that it would be useful to use parsing, but the program doesn't seem to work right.
void X() {
if(first=='(') {
firt=fgetc(fi);
X();
if(first!=')')
er++;
first=fgetc(fi);
}
else {
..
}
}
What would be an idea of beginning?
Thanks

I would like to propose an algorithm. First the pseudo code:
For each input character C:
If C is '(' then
increment counter
else if counter is 0 then // The closing paren has no matching opening
increment moves // so we "flip" it and counting as the opening
increment counter
else
decrement counter // This closing paren is balanced
end if
end For
// Now the counter is containing the number of unbalanced opening parentheses,
// so we add half of this number to moves, as half of them have to be balanced
moves = moves + counter / 2
return moves
Now in C:
#include <stdio.h>
#include <string.h>
int main(void) {
char input[] = "((((";
int len = strlen(input);
int i;
int moves = 0;
int count = 0;
for (i=0; i < len; i++)
{
if (input[i] == '(')
{
count ++;
}
else
{
if (count == 0)
{
count ++;
moves ++;
}
else
{
count --;
}
}
}
moves += count / 2;
printf("Moves: %d\n", moves);
return 0;
}
You are invited to test it with different inputs here, prove it's correctness or disprove with a counterexample input :)

Here's one way (in Pascal). Fixes the actual string and shows before and after.
function FixBrackets(s: string): Integer;
var
LeftToProcess, OpenCount: Integer;
I: Integer;
begin
writeln('in:', S);
Result := 0;
LeftToProcess := length(s);
OpenCount := 0;
for I := 1 to LeftToProcess do begin
case S[I] of
'(' :
if LeftToProcess <= OpenCount then begin
// we must close all
S[I] := ')';
inc(Result);
end else
inc(OpenCount);
')' :
if OpenCount = 0 then begin
// we have no open pars to close, so this has to be a new open
S[I] := '(';
inc(Result);
inc(OpenCount);
end else
dec(OpenCount);
end;
dec(LeftToProcess);
end;
writeln('out:', s);
end;

Here's an answer in C++:
template<class T>
int count_changes(T begin, T end) {
int offset = 0;
int changes = 0;
for (auto it = begin; it != end; ++it) {
if (*it == '(') ++offset;
else --offset;
if (offset < 0) {
offset = 1;
changes++;
}
}
return changes + ((offset + 1) / 2);
}
int main() {
std::string parens { "))(()" };
cout << parens << " : " << count_changes(parens.begin(), parens.end()) << endl;
}

Related

Cycle through an array in either direction based on a bool

I'm looking for a method of looping through some array in either direction based on some passed bool value, with the same functionality as:
void Transfer(bool *_payload, int _size, bool _isLSB)
{
if (_isLSB)
{
for (int i = _size - 1; i >= 0; i--)
{
digitalWrite(dataPin, _payload[i]);
}
}
else
{
for (int i = 0; i < _size; i++)
{
digitalWrite(dataPin, _payload[i]);
}
}
}
or
void Transfer(bool *_payload, int _size, bool _isLSB)
{
int _index = 0;
if (_isLSB) _index = _size - 1;
for (;;)
{
printf("%d",_payload[_index]);
if (_isLSB) _index--;
else _index++;
if (_isLSB && _index < 0) break;
if (!_isLSB && _index >= _size) break;
}
}
Other than creating a method that reverses the array, is there a nice simplification of this?
You can define the starting and ending point and the increment conditionally:
void Transfer(bool *_payload, int _size, bool _isLSB)
{
int increment = _isLSB ? -1 : 1;
int i = _isLSB ? _size : -1; // one before the area to scan
int end = _isLSB ? -1 : _size; // one past the area
while ((i += increment) != end) // incr/decr before testing
{
digitalWrite(dataPin, _payload[i]);
}
}
We do not know in advance which way the index will be changing (incrementing or decrementing), so we can't use less-than or greater-than in the loop condition. And after processing the last item the index will be modified once more, hence the stopping point is one past the area being processed.
Similarly we need the starting point one position before the scanned area, so that after incrementing (or decrementing) the index we process the valid, first item.
You can calculate the direction and the start/end position for the for loop depending on _isLSB
void Transfer(bool* _payload, int _size, bool _isLSB) {
int dir;
int start;
int end;
if(_isLSB) {
dir = -1;
start = _size-1;
end = -1;
}else {
dir = 1;
start = 0;
end = _size;
}
for(int i = start; i != end; i+=dir) {
digitalWrite(dataPin, _payload[i]);
}
}
What you could do for example, since in C true and false are expanded to integer values in reality, is to use said integer value for calculations.
In the following example I will extract the main problem from your question which is: Looping over a size in a direction depending on a boolean value
#include <math.h>
#include <stdbool.h>
#include <stdio.h>
int main()
{
int size = 5;
bool condition = false;
// Option #1
printf("Option #1\n");
for (int i = (size - 1) * condition; (i >= 0 && condition) || (i < size && !condition); i += 1 * pow(-1, condition))
{
printf("%d", i);
}
// Option #2
printf("\nOption #2\n");
int i = (size - 1) * condition;
for (;;)
{
printf("%d", i);
i += 1 * pow(-1, condition);
if ((i < 0 && condition) || (i >= size && !condition))
break;
}
return 0;
}
With the main function giving the following output for condition = true
Option #1
01234
Option #2
01234
And the following output for condition = false
Option #1
43210
Option #2
43210

How to determine why a piece of code produces an infinite loop?

This is my binary search function. I can't seem to find the error but every time I try to run the code it gives me a segmentation fault 11. I feel like my mistake has to do with my last else if statement.
void binary(struct list *A[], char search[15], int start, int
end) {
if(start <= end) {
int middle = (start + end)/2;
if(strcmp(search, A[middle]->name) == 0){
printf("found");
exit(0);
} else if (strcmp(search, A[middle]->name) > 0){
int start = middle + 1;
int end = end;
binary(A, search, start, end);
} else if (strcmp(search, A[middle]->name) < 0){
int start = start;
int end = middle - 1;
binary(A, search, start, end);
} else if (start == (end - 1)) {
printf("%s was not found in the list", search);
exit(0);
}
}
}
These statements
int end = end;
int start = start;
do not make sense because the variables are initialized by themselves while they have indeterminate values.
There is no need to declare local variables end and start. Use the parameters.
This statement
} else if (start == (end - 1)) {
printf("%s was not found in the list", search);
exit(0);
}
also does not make sense because initially the variables start and end satisfy the condition of enclosing if statement
if(start <= end) {
And at last it does not make sense to use standard function exit instead of the return statement..
First, as others already pointed out, the assignment like int end = end is asking for troubles. Do a simple test and print the start and end values at the beginning of the function to see what happens as your program works...
Next, you do not need recursion here! Shrinking the search area can be easily done in a simple loop:
void binary(struct list *A[], char search[15], int start, int end) {
while(start <= end) {
int middle = start + (end - start)/2;
int cmpresult = strcmp(search, A[middle]->name);
if (cmpresult > 0) {
start = middle + 1;
} else if (cmpresult < 0) {
end = middle - 1;
} else { // cmpresult == 0
printf("found at %d", middle);
return;
}
}
printf("%s was not found in the list", search);
}
Finally, please note the middle calculation – adding (start + end) is a common step to do that, however it may lead to error if the array is too long; specifically, if the array length exceeds a half of the maximum value representable by int type.

Find number of paths in a 2d binary array (C)

I have been asked this question during an interview, and have been struggling to find an elegant solution (in C), Problem statement:
You are given a two-dimensional array with M rows and N columns.
You are initially positioned at (0,0) which is the top-left cell in
the array.
You are allowed to move either right or downwards.
The array is filled with 1′s and 0′s. A 1 indicates that you can move
through that cell, a 0 indicates that you cannot move through the
cell.
Write a function in C ‘numberOfPaths’ which takes in the above two dimensional array, return the number of valid paths from the top-left cell to the bottom-right cell (i.e. [0,0] to [M-1,N-1]).
Edit: forgot to mention that the requirement is for a recursive solution
help would be greatly appreciated!
Thanks
If you are looking for a recursive solution you can use DFS.
DFS (array, x, y)
{
if (array [x][y]==0 || x>M || y>N){
return;
}
if (x==M && y==N){
count++;
return;
}
DFS (array, x, y+1);
DFS (array, x+1, y);
}
The number of paths to a given point is just the number of paths to the point above, plus the number of paths to the point to the left. So, the pseudo-code would roughly be:
num_paths[0][0] = 1;
for (x = 0; x < M; ++x)
for (y = 0; y < N; ++y)
if (!allowed_through[x][y])
num_paths[x][y] = 0;
else
num_paths[x][y] = num_paths[x-1][y] + num_paths[x][y-1];
You need special cases for x=0 and y=0, but otherwise, I think that should do.
#include <stdio.h>
int count=0;
int maxrows = 10;
int maxcols = 10;
int M, N;
void DFS (int array[][10], int x, int y)
{
int r, c;
/* process element at input row and column */
if (array [x][y]==0 || x>M || y>N){
/* no path forward; return */
return;
}
if (x==M-1 && y==N-1){
/* found path; increment count */
count++;
return;
}
/* recurse: to matrix starting from same row, next column */
r = x;
c = y +1;
if (c < N-1) {
DFS (array, r,c);
} else {
/* if last column - check to see */
/* if rest of rows in last column allow for a path */
int tr = r;
while ( tr <= M-1) {
if (array[tr][c] == 1) {
tr++;
}
else {
return;
}
}
/* reached last node - path exists! */
count++;
}
/* recurse: to matrix starting from next row, same column */
r = x+1;
c = y;
if (r < M-1) {
DFS (array, r,c);
} else {
/* if last row - check to see */
/* if rest of columns in last row allow for a path */
int tc = c;
while ( tc <= N-1) {
if (array[r][tc] == 1) {
tc++;
} else {
return;
}
}
/* reached last node - path exists! */
count++;
}
}
int main () {
int i, j;
scanf("%d %d",&M,&N);
int a[10][10] = {};
int row, col;
for(i=0;i<M;i++)
for(j=0;j<N;j++)
scanf("%d", &a[i][j]);
if ((M > maxrows) || (N > maxcols)) {
printf("max of 10 rows and 10 cols allowed for input\n");
return (-1);
};
/* print input matrix */
for(row=0;row<M;row++) {
for(col=0;col<N;col++){
printf("%d ",a[row][col]);
}
printf(" EOR\n");
}
DFS(a,0,0);
printf("number of paths is %d\n", count);
return 0;
}
Try this function its a preliminary step before printing all the paths.
If the size of the vector Out is 0 then the # of paths are 0, but if size(Out) > 0 then the size of vector Nodes + 1 are the total number of paths from top left to bottom right.
#include <iostream>
#include <vector>
using namespace std;
typedef vector<pair<int,int> > vPii;
bool pathTL2BR( int Arr2D[][4], vPii &Out, vPii &Nodes,
int _x,int _y, int _M, int _N)
{
bool out1 = false;
bool out2 = false;
if( Arr2D[_x][_y] == 1 )
{
if( _y+1 < _N )
out1 = pathTL2BR( Arr2D, Out, Nodes, _x, _y+1, _M, _N);
if( _x+1 < _M )
out2 = pathTL2BR( Arr2D, Out, Nodes, _x+1, _y, _M, _N);
if( (out1 || out2) ||
( (_x == (_M-1)) && (_y == (_N-1)) ) )
{
if(out1 && out2)
Nodes.push_back( make_pair(_x,_y ) );
Out.push_back( make_pair(_x,_y ) );
return true;
}
else
return false;
}
else
return false;
}
// Driver program to test above function
int main()
{
int Arr2D[][4] = {
{1,1,1,1},
{0,1,0,1},
{0,1,0,1},
{0,1,0,1}
};
vPii Out;
vPii Nodes;
vector<vPii> Output;
pathTL2BR( Arr2D, Out, Nodes, 0, 0, 4, 4);
return 0;
}
This is a python solution, I have put explanations in the comments.
def find_num_paths(arr_2D, i, j):
# i,j is the start point and you have to travel all the way back to 0,0
if i == j and i == 0:
return 1 # you have reached the start point
if i < 0 or j < 0 or arr_2D[i][j] == 0: # out of range or no path from that point
return 0
if arr_2D[i][j] == 1:
return find_num_paths(arr_2D, i, j-1) + find_num_paths(arr_2D, i-1, j) + find_num_paths(arr_2D, i-1, j-1) # you could go one step above, to the left or diagonally up.

Find length of smallest window that contains all the characters of a string in another string

Recently i have been interviewed. I didn't do well cause i got stuck at the following question
suppose a sequence is given : A D C B D A B C D A C D
and search sequence is like: A C D
task was to find the start and end index in given string that contains all the characters of search string preserving the order.
Output: assuming index start from 1:
start index 10
end index 12
explanation :
1.start/end index are not 1/3 respectively because though they contain the string but order was not maintained
2.start/end index are not 1/5 respectively because though they contain the string in the order but the length is not optimum
3.start/end index are not 6/9 respectively because though they contain the string in the order but the length is not optimum
Please go through How to find smallest substring which contains all characters from a given string?.
But the above question is different since the order is not maintained. I'm still struggling to maintain the indexes. Any help would be appreciated . thanks
I tried to write some simple c code to solve the problem:
Update:
I wrote a search function that looks for the required characters in correct order, returning the length of the window and storing the window start point to ìnt * startAt. The function processes a sub-sequence of given hay from specified startpoint int start to it's end
The rest of the algorithm is located in main where all possible subsequences are tested with a small optimisation: we start looking for the next window right after the startpoint of the previous one, so we skip some unnecessary turns. During the process we keep track f the 'till-now best solution
Complexity is O(n*n/2)
Update2:
unnecessary dependencies have been removed, unnecessary subsequent calls to strlen(...) have been replaced by size parameters passed to search(...)
#include <stdio.h>
// search for single occurrence
int search(const char hay[], int haySize, const char needle[], int needleSize, int start, int * startAt)
{
int i, charFound = 0;
// search from start to end
for (i = start; i < haySize; i++)
{
// found a character ?
if (hay[i] == needle[charFound])
{
// is it the first one?
if (charFound == 0)
*startAt = i; // store starting position
charFound++; // and go to next one
}
// are we done?
if (charFound == needleSize)
return i - *startAt + 1; // success
}
return -1; // failure
}
int main(int argc, char **argv)
{
char hay[] = "ADCBDABCDACD";
char needle[] = "ACD";
int resultStartAt, resultLength = -1, i, haySize = sizeof(hay) - 1, needleSize = sizeof(needle) - 1;
// search all possible occurrences
for (i = 0; i < haySize - needleSize; i++)
{
int startAt, length;
length = search(hay, haySize, needle, needleSize, i, &startAt);
// found something?
if (length != -1)
{
// check if it's the first result, or a one better than before
if ((resultLength == -1) || (resultLength > length))
{
resultLength = length;
resultStartAt = startAt;
}
// skip unnecessary steps in the next turn
i = startAt;
}
}
printf("start at: %d, length: %d\n", resultStartAt, resultLength);
return 0;
}
Start from the beginning of the string.
If you encounter an A, then mark the position and push it on a stack. After that, keep checking the characters sequentially until
1. If you encounter an A, update the A's position to current value.
2. If you encounter a C, push it onto the stack.
After you encounter a C, again keep checking the characters sequentially until,
1. If you encounter a D, erase the stack containing A and C and mark the score from A to D for this sub-sequence.
2. If you encounter an A, then start another Stack and mark this position as well.
2a. If now you encounter a C, then erase the earlier stacks and keep the most recent stack.
2b. If you encounter a D, then erase the older stack and mark the score and check if it is less than the current best score.
Keep doing this till you reach the end of the string.
The pseudo code can be something like:
Initialize stack = empty;
Initialize bestLength = mainString.size() + 1; // a large value for the subsequence.
Initialize currentLength = 0;
for ( int i = 0; i < mainString.size(); i++ ) {
if ( stack is empty ) {
if ( mainString[i] == 'A' ) {
start a new stack and push A on it.
mark the startPosition for this stack as i.
}
continue;
}
For each of the stacks ( there can be at most two stacks prevailing,
one of size 1 and other of size 0 ) {
if ( stack size == 1 ) // only A in it {
if ( mainString[i] == 'A' ) {
update the startPosition for this stack as i.
}
if ( mainString[i] == 'C' ) {
push C on to this stack.
}
} else if ( stack size == 2 ) // A & C in it {
if ( mainString[i] == 'C' ) {
if there is a stack with size 1, then delete this stack;// the other one dominates this stack.
}
if ( mainString[i] == 'D' ) {
mark the score from startPosition till i and update bestLength accordingly.
delete this stack.
}
}
}
}
I modified my previous suggestion using a single queue, now I believe this algorithm runs with O(N*m) time:
FindSequence(char[] sequenceList)
{
queue startSeqQueue;
int i = 0, k;
int minSequenceLength = sequenceList.length + 1;
int startIdx = -1, endIdx = -1;
for (i = 0; i < sequenceList.length - 2; i++)
{
if (sequenceList[i] == 'A')
{
startSeqQueue.queue(i);
}
}
while (startSeqQueue!=null)
{
i = startSeqQueue.enqueue();
k = i + 1;
while (sequenceList.length < k && sequenceList[k] != 'C')
if (sequenceList[i] == 'A') i = startSeqQueue.enqueue();
k++;
while (sequenceList.length < k && sequenceList[k] != 'D')
k++;
if (k < sequenceList.length && k > minSequenceLength > k - i + 1)
{
startIdx = i;
endIdx = j;
minSequenceLength = k - i + 1;
}
}
return startIdx & endIdx
}
My previous (O(1) memory) suggestion:
FindSequence(char[] sequenceList)
{
int i = 0, k;
int minSequenceLength = sequenceList.length + 1;
int startIdx = -1, endIdx = -1;
for (i = 0; i < sequenceList.length - 2; i++)
if (sequenceList[i] == 'A')
k = i+1;
while (sequenceList.length < k && sequenceList[k] != 'C')
k++;
while (sequenceList.length < k && sequenceList[k] != 'D')
k++;
if (k < sequenceList.length && k > minSequenceLength > k - i + 1)
{
startIdx = i;
endIdx = j;
minSequenceLength = k - i + 1;
}
return startIdx & endIdx;
}
Here's my version. It keeps track of possible candidates for an optimum solution. For each character in the hay, it checks whether this character is in sequence of each candidate. It then selectes the shortest candidate. Quite straightforward.
class ShortestSequenceFinder
{
public class Solution
{
public int StartIndex;
public int Length;
}
private class Candidate
{
public int StartIndex;
public int SearchIndex;
}
public Solution Execute(string hay, string needle)
{
var candidates = new List<Candidate>();
var result = new Solution() { Length = hay.Length + 1 };
for (int i = 0; i < hay.Length; i++)
{
char c = hay[i];
for (int j = candidates.Count - 1; j >= 0; j--)
{
if (c == needle[candidates[j].SearchIndex])
{
if (candidates[j].SearchIndex == needle.Length - 1)
{
int candidateLength = i - candidates[j].StartIndex;
if (candidateLength < result.Length)
{
result.Length = candidateLength;
result.StartIndex = candidates[j].StartIndex;
}
candidates.RemoveAt(j);
}
else
{
candidates[j].SearchIndex += 1;
}
}
}
if (c == needle[0])
candidates.Add(new Candidate { SearchIndex = 1, StartIndex = i });
}
return result;
}
}
It runs in O(n*m).
Here is my solution in Python. It returns the indexes assuming 0-indexed sequences. Therefore, for the given example it returns (9, 11) instead of (10, 12). Obviously it's easy to mutate this to return (10, 12) if you wish.
def solution(s, ss):
S, E = [], []
for i in xrange(len(s)):
if s[i] == ss[0]:
S.append(i)
if s[i] == ss[-1]:
E.append(i)
candidates = sorted([(start, end) for start in S for end in E
if start <= end and end - start >= len(ss) - 1],
lambda x,y: (x[1] - x[0]) - (y[1] - y[0]))
for cand in candidates:
i, j = cand[0], 0
while i <= cand[-1]:
if s[i] == ss[j]:
j += 1
i += 1
if j == len(ss):
return cand
Usage:
>>> from so import solution
>>> s = 'ADCBDABCDACD'
>>> solution(s, 'ACD')
(9, 11)
>>> solution(s, 'ADC')
(0, 2)
>>> solution(s, 'DCCD')
(1, 8)
>>> solution(s, s)
(0, 11)
>>> s = 'ABC'
>>> solution(s, 'B')
(1, 1)
>>> print solution(s, 'gibberish')
None
I think the time complexity is O(p log(p)) where p is the number of pairs of indexes in the sequence that refer to search_sequence[0] and search_sequence[-1] where the index for search_sequence[0] is less than the index forsearch_sequence[-1] because it sorts these p pairings using an O(n log n) algorithm. But then again, my substring iteration at the end could totally overshadow that sorting step. I'm not really sure.
It probably has a worst-case time complexity which is bounded by O(n*m) where n is the length of the sequence and m is the length of the search sequence, but at the moment I cannot think of an example worst-case.
Here is my O(m*n) algorithm in Java:
class ShortestWindowAlgorithm {
Multimap<Character, Integer> charToNeedleIdx; // Character -> indexes in needle, from rightmost to leftmost | Multimap is a class from Guava
int[] prefixesIdx; // prefixesIdx[i] -- rightmost index in the hay window that contains the shortest found prefix of needle[0..i]
int[] prefixesLengths; // prefixesLengths[i] -- shortest window containing needle[0..i]
public int shortestWindow(String hay, String needle) {
init(needle);
for (int i = 0; i < hay.length(); i++) {
for (int needleIdx : charToNeedleIdx.get(hay.charAt(i))) {
if (firstTimeAchievedPrefix(needleIdx) || foundShorterPrefix(needleIdx, i)) {
prefixesIdx[needleIdx] = i;
prefixesLengths[needleIdx] = getPrefixNewLength(needleIdx, i);
forgetOldPrefixes(needleIdx);
}
}
}
return prefixesLengths[prefixesLengths.length - 1];
}
private void init(String needle) {
charToNeedleIdx = ArrayListMultimap.create();
prefixesIdx = new int[needle.length()];
prefixesLengths = new int[needle.length()];
for (int i = needle.length() - 1; i >= 0; i--) {
charToNeedleIdx.put(needle.charAt(i), i);
prefixesIdx[i] = -1;
prefixesLengths[i] = -1;
}
}
private boolean firstTimeAchievedPrefix(int needleIdx) {
int shortestPrefixSoFar = prefixesLengths[needleIdx];
return shortestPrefixSoFar == -1 && (needleIdx == 0 || prefixesLengths[needleIdx - 1] != -1);
}
private boolean foundShorterPrefix(int needleIdx, int hayIdx) {
int shortestPrefixSoFar = prefixesLengths[needleIdx];
int newLength = getPrefixNewLength(needleIdx, hayIdx);
return newLength <= shortestPrefixSoFar;
}
private int getPrefixNewLength(int needleIdx, int hayIdx) {
return needleIdx == 0 ? 1 : (prefixesLengths[needleIdx - 1] + (hayIdx - prefixesIdx[needleIdx - 1]));
}
private void forgetOldPrefixes(int needleIdx) {
if (needleIdx > 0) {
prefixesLengths[needleIdx - 1] = -1;
prefixesIdx[needleIdx - 1] = -1;
}
}
}
It works on every input and also can handle repeated characters etc.
Here are some examples:
public class StackOverflow {
public static void main(String[] args) {
ShortestWindowAlgorithm algorithm = new ShortestWindowAlgorithm();
System.out.println(algorithm.shortestWindow("AXCXXCAXCXAXCXCXAXAXCXCXDXDXDXAXCXDXAXAXCD", "AACD")); // 6
System.out.println(algorithm.shortestWindow("ADCBDABCDACD", "ACD")); // 3
System.out.println(algorithm.shortestWindow("ADCBDABCD", "ACD")); // 4
}
I haven't read every answer here, but I don't think anyone has noticed that this is just a restricted version of local pairwise sequence alignment, in which we are only allowed to insert characters (and not delete or substitute them). As such it will be solved by a simplification of the Smith-Waterman algorithm that considers only 2 cases per vertex (arriving at the vertex either by matching a character exactly, or by inserting a character) rather than 3 cases. This algorithm is O(n^2).
Here's my solution. It follows one of the pattern matching solutions. Please comment/correct me if I'm wrong.
Given the input string as in the question
A D C B D A B C D A C D. Let's first compute the indices where A occurs. Assuming a zero based index this should be [0,5,9].
Now the pseudo code is as follows.
Store the indices of A in a list say *orders*.// orders=[0,5,9]
globalminStart, globalminEnd=0,localMinStart=0,localMinEnd=0;
for (index: orders)
{
int i =index;
Stack chars=new Stack();// to store the characters
i=localminStart;
while(i< length of input string)
{
if(str.charAt(i)=='C') // we've already seen A, so we look for C
st.push(str.charAt(i));
i++;
continue;
else if(str.charAt(i)=='D' and st.peek()=='C')
localminEnd=i; // we have a match! so assign value of i to len
i+=1;
break;
else if(str.charAt(i)=='A' )// seen the next A
break;
}
if (globalMinEnd-globalMinStart<localMinEnd-localMinStart)
{
globalMinEnd=localMinEnd;
globalMinStart=localMinStart;
}
}
return [globalMinstart,globalMinEnd]
}
P.S: this is pseudocode and a rough idea. Id be happy to correct it and understand if there's something wrong.
AFAIC Time complexity -O(n). Space complexity O(n)

find an element in infinite sorted array

I got this as an interview question ...
infinite array which is sorted and from some position (we dont know the position) only special symbol '$' will be there we need to find an element in that array ...
i gave a solution like get the first occurrance of $ and then do binary search on the previous part from $
to find the first occurance of $ i gave solution like increment in window size if (i,2i)
the code i gave is
#include<stdio.h>
int first(int *arr,int start,int end,int index)
{
int mid=(start+end)/2;
if((mid==start||arr[mid-1] != '$') && arr[mid]=='$')
return mid;
if(arr[mid]=='$')
return first(arr,start,mid-1,index);
else
{
if(arr[end] =='$')
return first(arr,mid+1,end,index);
else
return first(arr,end+1,(1<<index),index+1);
}
}
int binsearch(int *arr,int end ,int n)
{
int low,high,mid;
high=end-1;
low=0;
while(low<= high)
{
mid=(low+high)/2;
if(n<arr[mid])
high=mid-1;
else if (n >arr[mid])
low=mid+1;
else
return mid;
}
return -1;
}
int main()
{
int arr[20]={1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,'$','$','$','$','$','$','$','$','$','$'};
int i =first(arr,0,2,2);
printf("first occurance of $ is %d\n",i);
int n=20;//n is required element to be found
if(i==0||arr[i-1]<n)
printf(" element %d not found",n);
else{
int p=binsearch(arr,i,n);
if(p != -1)
printf("element %d is found at index %d",n,p);
else
printf(" element %d not found",n);
}
return 0;
}
Is there any better way to do the above problem ??
And also i wanted to know to find the first occurance of $ why should we move the window only in powers of 2 why not 3 like (i,3i)
Can someone pls through some light on the recurrance relation ..pls help..
Seems like a fine way to do it to me. As a small optimization, you can stop your first routine when you reach any number bigger than the one you're searching for (not just $).
Growing the window by powers of 2 means you'll find the end in log_2(n) iterations. Growing by factors of 3 means you'll find it in log_3(n) iterations, which is smaller. But not asymptotically smaller, as O(log_2(n)) == O(log_3(n)). And your binary search is going to take log_2(n) steps anyway, so making the first part faster is not going to help your big-O running time.
The efficient part of first function in iterative format would be
private int searchNum(int[] arr, int num, int start, int end) {
int index = 0;
boolean found = false;
for (int i = 0; i < arr.length; i = 1 << index) {
if (start + i < arr.length) {
if (arr[start] <= num && arr[start + i] >= num) {
found = true;
return bsearch(arr, num, start, start + i);
} else {
start = start + i;
}
} else {
return bsearch(arr, num, start, arr.length - 1);
}
}
return 0;
}
this wont return you first occurance but instead try to find number directly as in your case you are missing probability that number itself could be found even before finding the $ symbol. So worst case complexity is O(logn)..
and best case would be (1)
after that you pass this to
private int bsearch(int[] array, int search, int first, int last) {
int middle = (first + last) / 2;
while (first <= last) {
if (array[middle] < search)
first = middle + 1;
else if (array[middle] == search) {
System.out.println(search + " found at location "
+ (middle + 1) + ".");
return middle;
} else
last = middle - 1;
middle = (first + last) / 2;
}
if (first > last)
System.out.println(search + " is not present in the list.\n");
return -1;
}
calling function
if ((pos = searchNum(arr, num, 0, 2)) != -1) {
System.out.println("found # " + pos);
} else {
System.out.println("not found");
}
This is python solution.
arr = [3,5,7,9,10,90,100,130,140,160,170,171,172,173,174,175,176]
elm = 171
k = 0
while (True):
try:
i = (1 << k) - 1 # same as 2**k - 1 # eg 0,1,3,7,15
# print k
if(arr[i] == elm):
print "found at " + str(i)
exit()
elif( arr[i] > elm):
break
except Exception as e:
break
k = k+1
begin = 2**(k-1) # go back to previous power of 2
end = 2**k -1
# Binary search
while (begin <= end):
mid = begin + (end-begin)/2
try:
if(arr[mid] == elm):
print "found at " + str(mid)
exit()
elif(arr[mid] > elm):
end = mid-1
else:
begin = mid+1
except Exception as e:
# Exception can occur if you are trying to access min element and that is not available. hence set end to mid-1
end = mid-1
print "Element not found"

Resources