Skip to content

Done Trees-1#1736

Open
sainathek1999 wants to merge 1 commit intosuper30admin:masterfrom
sainathek1999:master
Open

Done Trees-1#1736
sainathek1999 wants to merge 1 commit intosuper30admin:masterfrom
sainathek1999:master

Conversation

@sainathek1999
Copy link
Copy Markdown

No description provided.

@super30admin
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Owner

Validate BST (problem1.java)

Your solution is excellent and correctly implements the inorder traversal approach to validate the BST. Here are some strengths and minor suggestions:

Strengths:

  • You correctly identified that an inorder traversal of a BST should yield strictly increasing values.
  • The use of a global prev node to compare with the current node is efficient and avoids unnecessary data structures.
  • The code is clean, well-commented, and follows good practices.

Areas for Improvement:

  1. Early Termination: Currently, even if the flag becomes false, the recursion continues. You can optimize by stopping the traversal as soon as the BST condition is violated. For example, you can check if (!flag) return; after the recursive call to the left subtree and before updating the prev node. This would save unnecessary computations.

  2. Global Variables: Using global variables (like flag and prev) might cause issues if the method is called multiple times in the same instance. However, since this is a LeetCode-style solution and the method is called once per instance, it's acceptable. Alternatively, you could avoid global variables by passing parameters or using a wrapper class, but this is minor.

  3. Edge Cases: Your solution handles null nodes correctly. However, consider the case where the tree has duplicate values. The problem states that the right subtree must have keys greater (not greater than or equal) than the node's key. Your condition prev.val >= root.val correctly checks for strict increasing order.

Suggested Optimization:
To add early termination, modify the helper function as follows:

void helper(TreeNode root) {
    if (root == null || !flag) {
        return;
    }
    helper(root.left);
    if (!flag) return; // Check after left traversal
    if (prev != null && prev.val >= root.val) {
        flag = false;
        return; // Stop further processing
    }
    prev = root;
    helper(root.right);
}

Overall, your solution is very good. With the early termination, it would be even more efficient in cases where the violation occurs early.

VERDICT: PASS


Construct Binary Tree from Preorder and Inorder Traversal (problem2.java)

Strengths:

  • The code is well-commented, explaining the approach and complexity analysis clearly.
  • The use of a HashMap for O(1) lookups in the inorder array is efficient.
  • The recursive helper function is implemented correctly, with base case handling and proper partitioning of the inorder indices.

Areas for Improvement:

  • The variable idx is declared as an instance variable. While this works, it might be better to avoid instance variables for recursion to make the code more thread-safe and reusable. Consider passing the index as a parameter or using a mutable container (like an array) to simulate pass-by-reference in Java.
  • The method helper does not explicitly check if idx is within bounds. Although the problem constraints ensure that the arrays are of the same length and the tree is built correctly, it's good practice to add a bounds check for idx in the helper function to prevent potential index-out-of-bounds errors in edge cases.
  • The variable names start and end in the helper function are clear, but rootIdx could be renamed to inorderIndex for clarity, as it represents the index of the root in the inorder array.

Overall, the solution is robust and follows best practices. The minor improvements suggested are mainly for code clarity and thread safety, but the solution is correct as is.

VERDICT: PASS

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