Asked by Ali
Let A and B be two data lists. Concatenation of the list A and another list B is defined to be equal to B, if
A is null; and is defined to be equal to concatenation of head of A with the concatenation of tail of A and
B, otherwise (where head of A is the first element of A, and tail of A is the list A after removing its head).
What is the time complexity behavior of this procedure for concatenation of lists?
A is null; and is defined to be equal to concatenation of head of A with the concatenation of tail of A and
B, otherwise (where head of A is the first element of A, and tail of A is the list A after removing its head).
What is the time complexity behavior of this procedure for concatenation of lists?
Answers
Answered by
MathMate
I interpret this as:
if (A==φ)A|B == B
else A|B = Ha|Tab
But then we're defining A|B using Tab,
which is the tail of A|B. Sounds to me a circular definition.
Can you please clarify the definition, or give your comments?
if (A==φ)A|B == B
else A|B = Ha|Tab
But then we're defining A|B using Tab,
which is the tail of A|B. Sounds to me a circular definition.
Can you please clarify the definition, or give your comments?
Answered by
Ali
well question related to advance analysis of algorithm i.e. BIG O
Answered by
MathMate
Are you already familiar with linked lists?
We assume A and B are singly linked lists, i.e. linked in the forward direction only.
To attain the end of a list, the node pointer must traverse every node from head to tail.
The number of operations is therefore n, where n=size of linked list A. Once the end-node is reached, it will then be made to point to, and replace, the head of list B. This means that the size of B is irrelevant.
Can you now find the big O from the above description?
We assume A and B are singly linked lists, i.e. linked in the forward direction only.
To attain the end of a list, the node pointer must traverse every node from head to tail.
The number of operations is therefore n, where n=size of linked list A. Once the end-node is reached, it will then be made to point to, and replace, the head of list B. This means that the size of B is irrelevant.
Can you now find the big O from the above description?
Answered by
Ali
well sir Thanks for the answer I understood the description but I am new in this subject.I still cant find big O.Really thankful for your act of kindness
There are no AI answers yet. The ability to request AI answers is coming soon!
Submit Your Answer
We prioritize human answers over AI answers.
If you are human, and you can answer this question, please submit your answer.