Completed PreCourse-2

[rbhargav0104]

No description provided.

[super30admin]

Exercise_1.cpp (Binary Search):

• Correctness: The binary search implementation is mostly correct but has a bug in calculating the mid index ((r-1) should be (r-l)). This would cause incorrect behavior.
• Time Complexity: Correctly identified as O(logn).
• Space Complexity: Correctly identified as O(logn) due to recursion stack.
• Code Quality: Well-structured and readable. The recursive approach is clear.
• Efficiency: The bug in mid calculation needs to be fixed for correct functionality.

Exercise_2.cpp (QuickSort):

• Correctness: The implementation has a logical error in the partition function where the swap outside the loop is incorrectly placed inside the loop.
• Time Complexity: Would be O(nlogn) if implemented correctly.
• Space Complexity: O(logn) due to recursion stack, which is correct.
• Code Quality: Generally good structure but the partition function needs fixing.
• Efficiency: The partition function needs to be corrected for proper sorting.

Exercise_3.cpp (Middle of Linked List):

• 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), correct for this approach.
• Code Quality: Well-structured and readable. Good use of pointers.
• Efficiency: Optimal solution for this problem.

Exercise_4.cpp (Merge Sort):

• Correctness: Correct implementation of merge sort.
• Time Complexity: O(nlogn), correctly implemented.
• Space Complexity: O(n) for temporary arrays, which is standard for merge sort.
• Code Quality: Well-structured and readable. Good separation of merge and sort functions.
• Efficiency: Standard implementation, no obvious optimizations needed.

Exercise_5.cpp (Iterative QuickSort):

• Correctness: Correct implementation of iterative quicksort using a stack.
• Time Complexity: O(nlogn) on average.
• Space Complexity: O(logn) for the stack, which is correct.
• Code Quality: Well-structured and readable. Good use of stack for iteration.
• Efficiency: Good implementation of iterative approach to avoid recursion stack limits.

General Observations:

• The student demonstrates good understanding of algorithms but needs to be more careful with implementation details.
• Code is generally well-structured and readable.
• Comments are appropriate and helpful.
• Some solutions have critical bugs that need fixing.
• Time and space complexity analysis is generally correct.