linked-list

问题 I'm using a table that has implemented a single-linked list (id, parent). This implementation has been working well except recently performance has become unbearable since my lists are getting long and I've been querying nodes individually. I found a promising blog on how to query this in a single query. http://explainextended.com/2009/03/25/sorting-lists/ SELECT @r AS _parent, @r := ( SELECT id FROM t_list WHERE parent = _parent ) AS id FROM ( SELECT @r := 0 ) vars, t_list Only thing is I'm

问题 I've wanted to create a radix sort implementation using queues. I couldn't figure out which part of my code has problems or which resources should I read. My code may be totally wrong but this is my implementation without any help (I haven't taken a data structures & algorithms course yet). I created a function but it didn't work. While doing research, I saw some code samples but they seemed to be more complex for me. Firstly I wanted to find the least significant digit of all integers Then

问题 Which way gives the faster enqueueing and dequeuing when I have to insert very few elements, Is array better than a linked list? I need to insert few element and I have to remove and read that removed element from queue. If it is array I may have to modify the indexes every time I remove an element. Inserting and deleting may happen simultaneously also. Which one is better from below case? typedef struct{ mylist list; struct mylistQ *next; }mylistQ; Array Code static mylist myListQ[QUEUESIZE

问题 So I have an assignment where I'm giving a random list of number and I need to sort them using insertion sort. I must use a singly linked list. I looked around at other posts but none seem to help. I get what insertion sort is but I just don't know how to write it in code. Node* insertion_sort(Node* head) { Node* temp = head_ptr; while((head->n < temp->n) && (temp != NULL)) temp = temp->next; head->next = temp->next; temp->next = head; head->prev = temp; } I dont know if this is right or what

问题 I need a circular linked list, so I am wondering if LinkedList is a circular linked list? 回答1: No. It is a doubly linked list, but not a circular linked list. See MSDN for details on this. LinkedList<T> makes a good foundation for your own circular linked list, however. But it does have a definite First and Last property, and will not enumerate around these, which a proper circular linked list will. 回答2: A quick solution to using it in a circular fashion, whenever you want to move the "next"

问题 This seems to be returning the correct answer, but I'm not sure if this is really the best way to go about things. It seems like I'm visiting the first n nodes too many times. Any suggestions? Note that I have to do this with a singly linked list. Node *findNodeFromLast( Node *head, int n ) { Node *currentNode; Node *behindCurrent; currentNode = head; for( int i = 0; i < n; i++ ) { if( currentNode->next ) { currentNode = currentNode->next; } else { return NULL; } } behindCurrent = head; while

问题 What is the difference when creating these two objects Queue<String> test = new LinkedList<String>(); and List<String> test2 = new LinkedList<String>(); What are the actual differences between test and test2 ? Are both of them LinkedList ? Are there performance differences or reasons to use one over the other? 回答1: The two statements you've written each construct a LinkedList<String> object to hold a list of strings, then assign it to a variable. The difference is in the type of the variable.

问题 I have created a linked list struct in c struct node{ int value; struct node* next; }; a method to add a node at the start of the list : void addFirst(struct node *list, int value){ struct node *new_node = (struct node*) malloc (sizeof (struct node)); new_node->value = value; new_node->next = list; list = new_node; } I create a list (malloc and everything), then call this method, it adds the new node inside the method but when i get back to my main my old list remains unchanged. Using DDD

问题 This question already has answers here : Closed 7 years ago . Possible Duplicate: Unable to reverse a linked list I'm trying to reverse a linked list: void LinkedList::reverseList() { Node *next=_head; Node *prev=0; while(next!=0) { Node *tmp=next->_next; next->_next=prev; prev=next; next=tmp; } } Lets say the list is: 4->3->2->1 When I print the list, I only see 1 (The print function is good). Any help? Thanks 回答1: Since you said you wanted to find the problem on your own, I'll just give you

问题 I wrote quantification functions exists , forall , and none for Haskell's build-in [] list data type. On multiple occasions, these seemed to prove much more efficient than Prelude / Data.List s any and all . I naively suspect that this performance is due to any and all being implemented using Θ(n) folds. Since I am relatively new to Haskell, I think I must be mistaken, or that there would be a good reason for this phenomenon. From Data.Foldable : -- | Determines whether any element of the