Skip to content

array-2#1884

Open
joshyoon92 wants to merge 2 commits into
super30admin:masterfrom
joshyoon92:master
Open

array-2#1884
joshyoon92 wants to merge 2 commits into
super30admin:masterfrom
joshyoon92:master

Conversation

@joshyoon92

Copy link
Copy Markdown

No description provided.

@super30admin

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Owner

Find All Numbers Disappeared in an Array (FindAllNum.java)

Strengths:

  • Excellent implementation of the in-place marking technique
  • Correctly handles edge cases like duplicate values
  • Achieves optimal time and space complexity
  • Clean and concise code

Areas for Improvement:

  • Add comments explaining the algorithm logic for better readability
  • Consider renaming the method to something more descriptive like findDisappearedNumbers
  • The method signature doesn't match the typical LeetCode format (should be public List<Integer> findDisappearedNumbers(int[] nums))

Minor suggestions:

  • Could add a null check for the input array
  • The use of Math.abs() is correct but could benefit from a brief comment explaining why negation is used

VERDICT: PASS


max and min (MaxMin.java)

EVALUATION

1. Correctness

The solution has critical bugs that prevent it from compiling and running:

  • Variable name mismatch: The code iterates over arr but the parameter is nums
  • The method signature doesn't match the problem requirements (returns List<Integer> instead of int[])
  • The solution doesn't produce correct output for edge cases (empty arrays, single elements)

2. Time Complexity

  • Student's solution: O(n log n) due to sorting
  • Reference solution: O(n) with fewer than 2*(N-2) comparisons
  • The student's approach is significantly less efficient for large datasets

3. Space Complexity

  • Student's solution: O(n) for the ArrayList
  • Reference solution: O(1) constant space
  • The reference solution uses in-place processing while the student creates unnecessary copies

4. Code Quality

  • The code has syntax errors (undefined variable arr)
  • Inconsistent variable naming (nums vs arr)
  • Unnecessary use of ArrayList when simple array would suffice
  • Commented code should be removed or properly formatted
  • Missing proper handling of edge cases

5. Efficiency

  • Sorting the entire array to find min/max is highly inefficient
  • The problem specifically asks for fewer than 2*(N-2) comparisons, which this solution doesn't achieve
  • Creating multiple ArrayList objects wastes memory

FEEDBACK

Strengths:

  • Clean variable naming within the result ArrayList
  • Good use of ArrayList methods for adding elements

Areas for Improvement:

  1. Fix the variable name bug: Change arr to nums in the for-each loop
  2. Use the correct variable name consistently: Stick to nums throughout
  3. Remove unnecessary sorting: The problem requires an efficient O(n) solution with minimal comparisons, not sorting
  4. Consider edge cases: Handle empty arrays and single-element arrays
  5. Simplify the return type: Use int[] instead of List<Integer> to match the reference solution
  6. Remove commented code: Clean up the commented array example

Suggested approach:

  • Compare elements in pairs
  • Track minimum and maximum separately
  • Process 2 elements per iteration to achieve the required comparison efficiency

The solution has a critical compilation error and doesn't meet the efficiency requirement of the problem. While the logic for finding min/max after sorting is conceptually correct, it fails to address the core requirement of minimizing comparisons and has syntax errors that prevent execution.

VERDICT: NEEDS_IMPROVEMENT


Game of Life (GameofLife.java)

Strengths:

  • Correctly implements the in-place algorithm using intermediate states
  • Properly handles boundary conditions in neighbor counting
  • Good use of comments to explain the intermediate values
  • Follows the same efficient approach as the reference solution

Areas for Improvement:

  1. Fix the variable name inconsistency (m parameter vs board usage) - this would cause a compilation error
  2. Move the dirs array to class level or make it a static constant to avoid recreating it for every cell
  3. Consider using more descriptive variable names (e.g., directions instead of dirs)
  4. Add proper error handling or documentation for edge cases

The solution is functionally correct and efficient, but needs the variable naming bug fixed.

VERDICT: NEEDS_IMPROVEMENT

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants