Completed Exercise 1,2,3,4,5

[kkhevna9252]

No description provided.

[super30admin]

Overall, the student's solutions are well-structured and demonstrate a good understanding of the algorithms. Here's a detailed evaluation for each exercise:

1. Exercise_1.java (Binary Search):

   • Correctness: The implementation correctly performs binary search, but sorting the array within the search function is unnecessary and increases time complexity (O(n log n) for sorting). Binary search assumes the input array is already sorted.
   • Time Complexity: Incorrectly stated as O(log n) due to the sorting step. Actual complexity is O(n log n).
   • Space Complexity: Correctly stated as O(1).
   • Improvement: Remove the sorting step and add a comment that the input array must be sorted.

2. Exercise_2.java (QuickSort):

   • Correctness: The implementation is correct and follows standard QuickSort approach.
   • Time Complexity: Correctly stated as O(n log n) average case and O(n²) worst case.
   • Space Complexity: Correctly stated as O(log n) for recursion stack.
   • Code Quality: Well-structured and readable. The swap method could be made private since it's a helper method.

3. Exercise_3.java (Linked List Middle):

   • Correctness: Correctly implements the fast/slow pointer approach to find the middle.
   • Time Complexity: O(n) as it traverses the list once.
   • Space Complexity: O(1) as it uses constant extra space.
   • Code Quality: Clean and efficient implementation.

4. Exercise_4.java (MergeSort):

   • Correctness: Correct implementation of MergeSort.
   • Time Complexity: Correctly stated as O(n log n).
   • Space Complexity: Correctly stated as O(n) for temporary arrays.
   • Code Quality: Well-structured. The merge method could be made private.

5. Exercise_5.java (Iterative QuickSort):

   • Correctness: Correct implementation using a stack to avoid recursion.
   • Time Complexity: Correctly stated as O(n log n) average case and O(n²) worst case.
   • Space Complexity: Correctly stated as O(log n) average case and O(n) worst case.
   • Code Quality: Good, but the XOR swap might be less readable than a temporary variable swap.

General Suggestions:

1. Add more comments explaining the algorithms' steps.
2. Consider adding input validation (e.g., null checks where appropriate).
3. For helper methods like swap(), consider making them private.
4. The binary search implementation should not sort the input array.