Completed Precourse-2

[nikhilsaimarri]

No description provided.

[super30admin]

Exercise_1.java (Binary Search):

• Correctness: The implementation correctly follows the binary search algorithm.
• Time Complexity: Correctly identified as O(logN).
• Space Complexity: Correctly identified as O(1).
• Code Quality: Well-structured and readable. The comments are helpful.
• Improvement: Could add input validation (e.g., checking if array is sorted).

Exercise_2.java (QuickSort):

• Correctness: Correct implementation of QuickSort with proper partitioning.
• Time Complexity: Correctly identified as O(N^2) in worst case, though average case is O(N logN).
• Space Complexity: Correctly identified as O(N) due to recursion stack.
• Code Quality: Good structure and comments. The swap method could be made static since it doesn't use instance variables.
• Improvement: Could mention the average case time complexity in comments.

Exercise_3.java (Linked List Middle):

• Correctness: Correct implementation using fast and slow pointers.
• Time Complexity: Correctly identified as O(N).
• Space Complexity: Correctly identified as O(1).
• Code Quality: Good structure. The variable names 'i' and 'j' could be more descriptive (e.g., 'slow' and 'fast').
• Improvement: The empty list check should print a newline for consistency.

Exercise_4.java (MergeSort):

• Correctness: Correct implementation of MergeSort.
• Time Complexity: Correctly O(N logN) though not explicitly stated.
• Space Complexity: Correctly O(N) for temporary arrays.
• Code Quality: Well-structured but the merge method is quite long. Could be broken into smaller methods.
• Improvement: The sort method calls merge unconditionally, which should only happen if l < r.

Exercise_5.java (Iterative QuickSort):

• Correctness: Correct implementation using a stack to remove recursion.
• Time Complexity: Correctly O(N^2) in worst case, though average case is O(N logN).
• Space Complexity: Correctly O(N) for the stack.
• Code Quality: Good structure. The swap method could be made static.
• Improvement: Could add comments explaining the stack operations more clearly.

Overall strengths:

• All implementations are correct and follow standard algorithms.
• Time and space complexities are correctly identified.
• Code is generally well-structured and readable.

Areas for improvement:

• Could add more input validation.
• Some variable names could be more descriptive.
• Some methods could be broken down further for readability.
• Could include more detailed comments about edge cases.