Related
Closed. This question needs to be more focused. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it focuses on one problem only by editing this post.
Closed 4 years ago.
Improve this question
The problem comes from Codility programming training and it sounds as follows:
we have an array (A[]) with n (ranging from 1 to 100,000) elements and these are our parameters. The elements of the array are integers from ā2,147,483,648 to 2,147,483,647, and we need to find smallest positive integer that is NOT in the array. Of course this could be done easily in O(n*log n) by sorting them all and going through the sorted array, looking for the missing posiitve number (this last operation has O(n) worst time complexity in my solution). But according to Codility, this ENTIRE problem can be done in O(n), and I cannot see any way to do that. Could someone give some tips to let me get un-stuck?
PS Here is a link to detailed description of the problem which I'm not allowed to copy - https://codility.com/c/intro/demo35UEXH-EAT
By pigeonhole principle, at least one of the numbers 1, 2, ..., n+1 is not in the array.
Let us create a boolean array b of size n+1 to store whether each of these numbers is present.
Now, we process the input array. If we find a number from 1 to n+1, we mark the corresponding entry in b. If the number we see does not fit into these bounds, just discard it and proceed to the next one. Both cases are O(1) per input entry, total O(n).
After we are done processing the input, we can find the first non-marked entry in our boolean array b trivially in O(n).
Simple solution 100% in Java.
Please note it is O(nlogn) solution but gives 100% result in codility.
public static int solution(final int[] A)
{
Arrays.sort(A);
int min = 1;
// Starting from 1 (min), compare all elements, if it does not match
// that would the missing number.
for (int i : A) {
if (i == min) {
min++;
}
}
return min;
}
wrote this today and got 100/100. not the most elegant solution, but easy to understand -
public int solution(int[] A) {
int max = A.length;
int threshold = 1;
boolean[] bitmap = new boolean[max + 1];
//populate bitmap and also find highest positive int in input list.
for (int i = 0; i < A.length; i++) {
if (A[i] > 0 && A[i] <= max) {
bitmap[A[i]] = true;
}
if (A[i] > threshold) {
threshold = A[i];
}
}
//find the first positive number in bitmap that is false.
for (int i = 1; i < bitmap.length; i++) {
if (!bitmap[i]) {
return i;
}
}
//this is to handle the case when input array is not missing any element.
return (threshold+1);
}
public int solutionMissingInteger(int[] A) {
int solution = 1;
HashSet<Integer> hashSet = new HashSet<>();
for(int i=0; i<A.length; ++i){
if(A[i]<1) continue;
if(hashSet.add(A[i])){
//this int was not handled before
while(hashSet.contains(solution)){
solution++;
}
}
}
return solution;
}
Simple Java soution. Scored 100/100 in correctness and performance.
public int solution(int[] A) {
int smallestMissingInteger = 1;
if (A.length == 0) {
return smallestMissingInteger;
}
Set<Integer> set = new HashSet<Integer>();
for (int i = 0; i < A.length; i++) {
if (A[i] > 0) {
set.add(A[i]);
}
}
while (set.contains(smallestMissingInteger)) {
smallestMissingInteger++;
}
return smallestMissingInteger;
}
Build a hash table of all the values. For the numbers 1 to n + 1, check if they are in the hash table. At least one of them is not. Print out the lowest such number.
This is O(n) expected time (you can get with high probability). See #Gassa's answer for how to avoid the hash table in favor of a lookup table of size O(n).
JavaScript 100%
function solution(A) {
let sortedOb = {};
let biggest = 0;
A.forEach(el => {
if (el > 0) {
sortedOb[el] = 0;
biggest = el > biggest ? el : biggest;
}
});
let arr = Object.keys(sortedOb).map(el => +el);
if (arr.length == 0) return 1;
for(let i = 1; i <= biggest; i++) {
if (sortedOb[i] === undefined) return i;
}
return biggest + 1;
}
100% Javascript
function solution(A) {
// write your code in JavaScript (Node.js 4.0.0)
var max = 0;
var array = [];
for (var i = 0; i < A.length; i++) {
if (A[i] > 0) {
if (A[i] > max) {
max = A[i];
}
array[A[i]] = 0;
}
}
var min = max;
if (max < 1) {
return 1;
}
for (var j = 1; j < max; j++) {
if (typeof array[j] === 'undefined') {
return j
}
}
if (min === max) {
return max + 1;
}
}
C# scored 100%,
Explanation: use of lookup table where we store already seen values from input array, we only care about values that are greater than 0 and lower or equal than length on input array
public static int solution(int[] A)
{
var lookUpArray = new bool[A.Length];
for (int i = 0; i < A.Length; i++)
if (A[i] > 0 && A[i] <= A.Length)
lookUpArray[A[i] - 1] = true;
for (int i = 0; i < lookUpArray.Length; i++)
if (!lookUpArray[i])
return i + 1;
return A.Length + 1;
}
This is my solution is Swift 4
public func solution(_ A: inout [Int]) -> Int {
var minNum = 1
var hashSet = Set<Int>()
for int in A {
if int > 0 {
hashSet.insert(int)
}
}
while hashSet.contains(minNum) {
minNum += 1
}
return minNum
}
var array = [1,3,6]
solution(&array)
// Answer: 2
100%: the Python sort routine is not regarded as cheating...
def solution(A):
"""
Sort the array then loop till the value is higher than expected
"""
missing = 1
for elem in sorted(A):
if elem == missing:
missing += 1
if elem > missing:
break
return missing
It worked for me. It is not O(n), but little simpler:
import java.util.stream.*;
class Solution {
public int solution(int[] A) {
A = IntStream.of(A)
.filter(x->x>0)
.distinct()
.sorted()
.toArray();
int min = 1;
for(int val : A)
{
if(val==min)
min++;
else
return min;
}
return min;
}
}
My solution. 100%. In Java.
import java.util.ArrayList;
import java.util.Arrays;
import java.util.List;
public class Solution {
public int solution(int[] A) {
Arrays.sort(A);
ArrayList<Integer> positive = new ArrayList<>();
for (int i = 0; i < A.length; i++) {
if(A[i] > 0)
positive.add(A[i]);
}
if(positive.isEmpty()) return 1;
if(positive.get(0) > 1) return 1;
for(int i = 0; i < positive.size() - 1; i++) {
if(positive.get(i + 1) - positive.get(i) > 1)
return positive.get(i) + 1;
}
return positive.get(positive.size() - 1) + 1;
}
public static void main(String[] args) {
Solution solution = new Solution();
int[] A = {-5,1,2,3,4,6,7,8,9,5};
System.out.println(solution.solution(A));
}
}
javascript 100% 100%
first sort the array, you just need to scan positive elements so find index of 1 (if there is no 1 in array then answer is 1). then search elements after 1 till find missing number.
function solution(A) {
// write your code in JavaScript (Node.js 6.4.0)
var missing = 1;
// sort the array.
A.sort(function(a, b) { return a-b });
// try to find the 1 in sorted array if there is no 1 so answer is 1
if ( A.indexOf(1) == -1) { return 1; }
// just search positive numbers to find missing number
for ( var i = A.indexOf(1); i < A.length; i++) {
if ( A[i] != missing) {
missing++;
if ( A[i] != missing ) { return missing; }
}
}
// if cant find any missing number return next integer number
return missing + 1;
}
I believe the solution is more involved than 'marking' corresponding values using a boolean array of n (100,000) elements. The boolean array of size n will not 'directly' map to the possible range of values (ā2,147,483,648 to 2,147,483,647).
This Java example I wrote attempts to map the 100K rows by mapping the value based on their offset from the max value. It also performs a modulus to reduce the resulting array to the same size as the sample element length.
/**
*
* This algorithm calculates the values from the min value and mods this offset with the size of the 100K sample size.
* This routine performs 3 scans.
* 1. Find the min/max
* 2. Record the offsets for the positive integers
* 3. Scan the offsets to find missing value.
*
* #author Paul Goddard
*
*/
public class SmallestPositiveIntMissing {
static int ARRAY_SIZE = 100000;
public static int solve(int[] array) {
int answer = -1;
Maxmin maxmin = getMaxmin(array);
int range = maxmin.max - maxmin.min;
System.out.println("min: " + maxmin.min);
System.out.println("max: " + maxmin.max);
System.out.println("range: " + range);
Integer[] values = new Integer[ARRAY_SIZE];
if (range == ARRAY_SIZE) {
System.out.println("No gaps");
return maxmin.max + 1;
}
for (int val: array) {
if (val > 0) {
int offset = val - maxmin.min;
int index = offset % ARRAY_SIZE;
values[index] = val;
}
}
for (int i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE; i++) {
if (values[i] == null) {
int missing = maxmin.min + i;
System.out.println("Missing: " + missing);
answer = missing;
break;
}
}
return answer;
}
public static Maxmin getMaxmin(int[] array) {
int max = Integer.MIN_VALUE;
int min = Integer.MAX_VALUE;
for (int val:array) {
if (val >=0) {
if (val > max) max = val;
if (val < min) min = val;
}
}
return new Maxmin(max,min);
}
public static void main(String[] args) {
int[] A = arrayBuilder();
System.out.println("Min not in array: " + solve(A));
}
public static int[] arrayBuilder() {
int[] array = new int[ARRAY_SIZE];
Random random = new Random();
System.out.println("array: ");
for (int i=0;i < ARRAY_SIZE; i++) {
array[i] = random.nextInt();
System.out.print(array[i] + ", ");
}
System.out.println(" array done.");
return array;
}
}
class Maxmin {
int max;
int min;
Maxmin(int max, int min) {
this.max = max;
this.min = min;
}
}
Sweet Swift version. 100% correct
public func solution(inout A : [Int]) -> Int {
//Create a Hash table
var H = [Int:Bool]()
// Create the minimum possible return value
var high = 1
//Iterate
for i in 0..<A.count {
// Get the highest element
high = A[i] > high ? A[i] : high
// Fill hash table
if (A[i] > 0){
H[A[i]] = true
}
}
// iterate through possible values on the hash table
for j in 1...high {
// If you could not find it on the hash, return it
if H[j] != true {
return j
} else {
// If you went through all values on the hash
// and can't find it, return the next higher value
// e.g.: [1,2,3,4] returns 5
if (j == high) {
return high + 1
}
}
}
return high
}
int[] copy = new int[A.length];
for (int i : A)
{
if (i > 0 && i <= A.length)
{
copy[i - 1] = 1;
}
}
for (int i = 0; i < copy.length; i++)
{
if (copy[i] == 0)
{
return i + 1;
}
}
return A.length + 1;
Swift 3 - 100%
public func solution(_ A : inout [Int]) -> Int {
// write your code in Swift 3.0 (Linux)
var solution = 1
var hashSet = Set<Int>()
for int in A
{
if int > 0
{
hashSet.insert(int)
while hashSet.contains(solution)
{
solution += 1
}
}
}
return solution
}
Thanks to Marian's answer above.
This is my solution using python:
def solution(A):
m = max(A)
if m <= 0:
return 1
if m == 1:
return 2
# Build a sorted list with all elements in A
s = sorted(list(set(A)))
b = 0
# Iterate over the unique list trying to find integers not existing in A
for i in xrange(len(s)):
x = s[i]
# If the current element is lte 0, just skip it
if x <= 0:
continue;
b = b + 1
# If the current element is not equal to the current position,
# it means that the current position is missing from A
if x != b:
return b
return m + 1
Scored 100%/100% https://codility.com/demo/results/demoDCU7CA-SBR/
Create a binary array bin of N+1 length (C uses 0 based indexing)
Traverse the binary array O(n)
If A[i] is within the bounds of bin then mark bin entry at index A[i] as present or true.
Traverse the binary array again
Index of any bin entry that is not present or false is your missing integer
~
#include<stdio.h>
#include<stdlib.h>
#include<stdbool.h>
int solution(int A[], int N) {
// write your code in C99 (gcc 6.2.0)
int i;
bool *bin = (bool *)calloc((N+1),sizeof(bool));
for (i = 0; i < N; i++)
{
if (A[i] > 0 && A[i] < N+1)
{
bin[A[i]] = true;
}
}
for (i = 1; i < N+1; i++)
{
if (bin[i] == false)
{
break;
}
}
return i;
}
May be helpful, I am using arithmetic progression to calculate the sum, and using binary searach the element is fetched. checked with array of couple of hundred values works good. As there is one for loop and itression in step of 2, O(n/2) or less
def Missingelement (A):
B = [x for x in range(1,max(A)+1,1)]
n1 = len(B) - 1
begin = 0
end = (n1)//2
result = 0
print(A)
print(B)
if (len(A) < len(B)):
for i in range(2,n1,2):
if BinSum(A,begin,end) > BinSum(B,begin,end) :
end = (end + begin)//2
if (end - begin) <= 1 :
result=B[begin + 1 ]
elif BinSum(A,begin,end) == BinSum(B,begin,end):
r = end - begin
begin = end
end = (end + r)
if begin == end :
result=B[begin + 1 ]
return result
def BinSum(C,begin,end):
n = (end - begin)
if end >= len(C):
end = len(C) - 1
sum = n*((C[begin]+C[end])/2)
return sum
def main():
A=[1,2,3,5,6,7,9,10,11,12,14,15]
print ("smallest number missing is ",Missingelement(A))
if __name__ == '__main__': main()
Code for C, in fact, this can be used for any programming language without any change in the logic.
Logic is sum of N number is N*(N+1)/2.
int solution(int A[], int N) {
// write your code in C99
long long sum=0;
long long i;
long long Nsum=0;
for(i=0;i<N;i++){
sum=sum + (long long)A[i];
}
if (N%2==0){
Nsum= (N+1)*((N+2)/2);
return (int)(Nsum-sum);
}
else{
Nsum= ((N+1)/2)*(N+2);
return (int)(Nsum-sum);
}
}
This gave the 100/100 score.
This solution gets 100/100 on the test:
class Solution {
public int solution(int[] A) {
int x = 0;
while (x < A.length) {
// Keep swapping the values into the matching array positions.
if (A[x] > 0 && A[x] <= A.length && A[A[x]-1] != A[x]) {
swap(A, x, A[x] - 1);
} else {
x++; // Just need to increment when current element and position match.
}
}
for (int y=0; y < A.length; y++) {
// Find first element that doesn't match position.
// Array is 0 based while numbers are 1 based.
if (A[y] != y + 1) {
return y + 1;
}
}
return A.length + 1;
}
private void swap (int[] a, int i, int j) {
int t = a[i];
a[i] = a[j];
a[j] = t;
}
}
100% in PHP https://codility.com/demo/results/trainingKFXWKW-56V/
function solution($A){
$A = array_unique($A);
sort($A);
if (empty($A)) return 1;
if (max($A) <= 0) return 1;
if (max($A) == 1) return 2;
if (in_array(1, $A)) {
$A = array_slice($A, array_search(1, $A)); // from 0 to the end
array_unshift($A, 0); // Explanation 6a
if ( max($A) == array_search(max($A), $A)) return max($A) + 1; // Explanation 6b
for ($i = 1; $i <= count($A); $i++){
if ($A[$i] != $i) return $i; // Explanation 6c
}
} else {
return 1;
}
}
// Explanation
remove all duplicates
sort from min to max
if the array is empty return 1
if max of array is zero or less, return 1
if max of array is 1, return 2 // next positive integer
all other cases:
6a) split the array from value 1 to the end and add 0 before first number
6b) if the value of last element of array is the max of array, then the array is ascending so we return max + 1 // next positive integer
6c) if the array is not ascending, we find a missing number by a function for: if key of element is not as value the element but it should be (A = [0=>0, 1=>1,2=>3,...]), we return the key, because we expect the key and value to be equal.
Here is my solution, it Yields 88% in evaluation- Time is O(n), Correctness 100%, Performance 75%. REMEMBER - it is possible to have an array of all negative numbers, or numbers that exceed 100,000. Most of the above solutions (with actual code) yield much lower scores, or just do not work. Others seem to be irrelevant to the Missing Integer problem presented on Codility.
int compare( const void * arg1, const void * arg2 )
{
return *((int*)arg1) - *((int*)arg2);
}
solution( int A[], int N )
{
// Make a copy of the original array
// So as not to disrupt it's contents.
int * A2 = (int*)malloc( sizeof(int) * N );
memcpy( A2, A1, sizeof(int) * N );
// Quick sort it.
qsort( &A2[0], N, sizeof(int), compare );
// Start out with a minimum of 1 (lowest positive number)
int min = 1;
int i = 0;
// Skip past any negative or 0 numbers.
while( (A2[i] < 0) && (i < N )
{
i++;
}
// A variable to tell if we found the current minimum
int found;
while( i < N )
{
// We have not yet found the current minimum
found = 0;
while( (A2[i] == min) && (i < N) )
{
// We have found the current minimum
found = 1;
// move past all in the array that are that minimum
i++;
}
// If we are at the end of the array
if( i == N )
{
// Increment min once more and get out.
min++;
break;
}
// If we found the current minimum in the array
if( found == 1 )
{
// progress to the next minimum
min++;
}
else
{
// We did not find the current minimum - it is missing
// Get out - the current minimum is the missing one
break;
}
}
// Always free memory.
free( A2 );
return min;
}
My 100/100 solution
public int solution(int[] A) {
Arrays.sort(A);
for (int i = 1; i < 1_000_000; i++) {
if (Arrays.binarySearch(A, i) < 0){
return i;
}
}
return -1;
}
static int spn(int[] array)
{
int returnValue = 1;
int currentCandidate = 2147483647;
foreach (int item in array)
{
if (item > 0)
{
if (item < currentCandidate)
{
currentCandidate = item;
}
if (item <= returnValue)
{
returnValue++;
}
}
}
return returnValue;
}
I was wondering if there is an efficient premade algorithm for determining if the sum/difference of a group of numbers can equal a different number. Example:
5, 8, 10, 2, using + or -, to equal 9.
5 - 8 = -3 + 10 = 7 + 2 = 9
If there is a preexisting algorithm, what is it called. If not, I can figure out how to program it, though it may not be efficient.
Thank you!
Yeah, this is basically knapsack problem, but it can be computed in pseudopolynomial time using dynamic programming.
I did it few month ago, so maybe this java code can help you, if you want to implement it :
public void solve() {
while (this.isEnd() == false) {
int priceSum = this.getItemsInstance().getTotalPrice()/divide;
int numOfItems = this.getItemsInstance().itemCount();
int maxWeight = this.getItemsInstance().getMaxWeight();
int[][] array = new int[numOfItems + 1][priceSum + 1];
boolean[][] arrayCounted = new boolean[numOfItems + 1][priceSum + 1];
for (int i = 0; i < numOfItems + 1; i++) {
array[i][0] = 0;
arrayCounted[i][0] = true;
}
int max = 0;
int price = 0;
for (int j = 1; j < priceSum + 1; j++) {
for (int i = 1; i < numOfItems + 1; i++) {
int temp = W(i, j, array, arrayCounted);
if (temp <= maxWeight) {
max = temp;
price = j;
}
}
}
}
}
private int W(int i, int c, int[][] array, boolean[][] arrayCounted) {
if (c < 0) {
return MAX_PRICE / divide;
}
if (i == 0) {
if (c == 0) {
return 0;
} else {
return MAX_PRICE / divide;
}
}
if (arrayCounted[i][c]) {
return array[i][c];
}
arrayCounted[i][c] = true;
array[i][c] = Math.min(W(i - 1, c, array, arrayCounted), W(i - 1, c - this.items[i - 1].price/divide, array, arrayCounted) + this.items[i - 1].weight);
return array[i][c];
}
its not an NP problem, if the problem is to find a given number from adding or subtracting each elements of a list/array. if you think about AP. here is a sample code in C++
int Np( int mn, list<int>a, int c )
{
int size = a.size(), rst = 0, maxI = 0;
std::list<int>::iterator it;
while( size > c )
{
a.sort();
maxI += a.back();
a.pop_back();
rst = 0;
for( auto ele : a )
{
rst += ele;
cout << rst << endl;
}
if( (rst - maxI) == mn or (maxI - rst) == mn or (maxI + rst) == mn )
{
return mn;
}
size--;
}
return rst;
}
this should help. i think.
I actually wrote a simple java program, I was not actually aware of knapsack strategies. This is my own solution. Hope this helps
import java.util.ArrayList;
import java.util.List;
public class Puzzle {
public static void main(String[] args) {
int targetNumber = 0;
int min = 2147483647;
int[] numbers = {-10, -30, -20, -50};
//int[] numbers = {0,0,0,0};
//int[] numbers = {7, 2, 10};
//int[] numbers = {1, 2, 3, 4, 5};
//int[] numbers = {1000, 2, 3, 4, 100};
char set[] = {'+', '-'};
min = getNumberClosestToTarget(numbers, set, min, targetNumber);
System.out.println(String.format(" %d is closest to %d", min, targetNumber));
}
private static int getNumberClosestToTarget(int[] numbers, char[] set, int min, int targetNumber) {
List<String> operators = new ArrayList<>();
computeAllOperatorsCombination(set, "", set.length, numbers.length - 1, operators);
for (String operatorString : operators) {
String[] ops = operatorString.split("");
int sum = computeSum(numbers, ops, numbers.length - 1);
min = getClosestToTarget(min, targetNumber, sum);
}
return min;
}
static int computeSum(int[] numbers, String[] operators, int index) {
int result = numbers[index];
if (index == 0) {
return result;
} else {
switch (operators[index - 1]) {
case "+":
return computeSum(numbers, operators, index - 1) + result;
case "-":
return computeSum(numbers, operators, index - 1) - result;
}
return result;
}
}
static void computeAllOperatorsCombination(char set[], String prefix, int n, int k, List<String> result) {
if (k == 0) {
result.add(prefix);
return;
}
for (int i = 0; i < n; i++) {
String newPrefix;
newPrefix = prefix + set[i];
computeAllOperatorsCombination(set, newPrefix, n, k - 1, result);
}
}
private static int getClosestToTarget(int min, int targetNumber, int r) {
int distance = Math.abs(targetNumber - r) < Math.abs(r - targetNumber) ? Math.abs(targetNumber - r) : Math.abs(r - targetNumber);
if (distance < Math.abs(min)) {
min = distance;
if (r < 0) {
min = -distance;
}
}
return min;
}
}
For example,
rank permutation
0 abc
1 acb
2 bac
3 bca
4 cab
5 cba
So, if one asks give me permutation with rank 4, the answer is cab. Pls give the java code for this program
I made it at a first attempt!! :-)
Really good homework, nice problem, you made my day! Here is a solution in javascript:
function permutation (rank, n, chars)
{
var fact, char_idx, this_char;
if (n == 0)
return "";
char_idx = Math.floor(rank / factorial(n - 1));
this_char = chars.splice(char_idx, 1);
// returns the char with index char_idx and removes it from array
return this_char +
permutation(rank % factorial(n - 1), n - 1, chars);
}
Just call it like permutation(5, 3, ['a', 'b', 'c']) and that's it.
You have to write your own factorial() function - as a homework :-)
Here is a c# version: basic idea is to using factorial to determine the permutation, rather than by trying to get all the permutations (you may refer to my blog # http://codingworkout.blogspot.com/2014/08/kth-permutation.html)
public string GetKthPermutation(string s, int k, int[] factorial)
{
if (k == 1)
{
return s;
}
Assert.IsTrue(k > 1);
int numbeOfPermutationsWithRemainingElements = factorial[s.Length-1];
string permutation = null;
if (k <= numbeOfPermutationsWithRemainingElements)
{
//just find the kthPermutation using remaining elements
permutation = s[0] + this.GetKthPermutation(s.Substring(1), k,
factorial);
return permutation;
}
int quotient = k / numbeOfPermutationsWithRemainingElements;
int remainder = k % numbeOfPermutationsWithRemainingElements;
Assert.IsTrue(quotient > 0);
int indexOfCurrentCharacter = quotient;
if(remainder == 0)
{
indexOfCurrentCharacter -= 1;
}
permutation = s[indexOfCurrentCharacter].ToString();
Assert.IsTrue(indexOfCurrentCharacter > 0);
Assert.IsTrue(indexOfCurrentCharacter < s.Length);
string remainingCharactersString = s.Substring(0, indexOfCurrentCharacter);
if(indexOfCurrentCharacter < (s.Length-1))
{
remainingCharactersString += s.Substring(indexOfCurrentCharacter + 1);
}
if(remainder == 0)
{
k = numbeOfPermutationsWithRemainingElements;
}
else
{
k = remainder;
}
permutation += this.GetKthPermutation(remainingCharactersString, k, factorial);
return permutation;
}
where
public string GetKthPermutation(string s, int k)
{
s.ThrowIfNullOrWhiteSpace("a");
k.Throw("k", ik => ik <= 0);
int[] factorial = new int[s.Length+1];
factorial[0] = 0;
factorial[1] = 1;
for(int i =2;i<=s.Length; i++)
{
factorial[i] = factorial[i - 1] * i;
}
if(k > factorial[s.Length])
{
throw new Exception(string.Format("There will be no '{0}' permuation as the total number of permutations that can be abieved are '{1}'", k, s.Length));
}
string kthPermutation = this.GetKthPermutation(s, k, factorial);
return kthPermutation;
}
Unit Test
[TestMethod]
public void KthPermutationTests()
{
string s1 = "abc";
string[] perms1 = { "abc", "acb", "bac", "bca", "cab", "cba"};
for(int i =1;i<=6;i++)
{
string s = this.GetKthPermutation(s1, i);
Assert.AreEqual(s, perms1[i - 1]);
string ss = this.GetKthPermutation_BruteForce(s1, i);
Assert.AreEqual(ss, s);
}
s1 = "123";
perms1 = new string[] {"123", "132", "213", "231", "312", "321"};
for (int i = 1; i <= 6; i++)
{
string s = this.GetKthPermutation(s1, i);
Assert.AreEqual(s, perms1[i - 1]);
string ss = this.GetKthPermutation_BruteForce(s1, i);
Assert.AreEqual(ss, s);
}
s1 = "1234";
perms1 = new string[] { "1234", "1243", "1324", "1342", "1423", "1432",
"2134", "2143", "2314", "2341", "2413", "2431",
"3124", "3142", "3214", "3241", "3412", "3421",
"4123", "4132", "4213", "4231", "4312", "4321"};
for (int i = 1; i <= 24; i++)
{
string s = this.GetKthPermutation(s1, i);
Assert.AreEqual(s, perms1[i - 1]);
string ss = this.GetKthPermutation_BruteForce(s1, i);
Assert.AreEqual(ss, s);
}
}
Given array of n integers and given a number X, find all the unique pairs of elements (a,b), whose summation is equal to X.
The following is my solution, it is O(nLog(n)+n), but I am not sure whether or not it is optimal.
int main(void)
{
int arr [10] = {1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,0};
findpair(arr, 10, 7);
}
void findpair(int arr[], int len, int sum)
{
std::sort(arr, arr+len);
int i = 0;
int j = len -1;
while( i < j){
while((arr[i] + arr[j]) <= sum && i < j)
{
if((arr[i] + arr[j]) == sum)
cout << "(" << arr[i] << "," << arr[j] << ")" << endl;
i++;
}
j--;
while((arr[i] + arr[j]) >= sum && i < j)
{
if((arr[i] + arr[j]) == sum)
cout << "(" << arr[i] << "," << arr[j] << ")" << endl;
j--;
}
}
}
There are 3 approaches to this solution:
Let the sum be T and n be the size of array
Approach 1:
The naive way to do this would be to check all combinations (n choose 2). This exhaustive search is O(n2).
Approach 2:
A better way would be to sort the array. This takes O(n log n)
Then for each x in array A,
use binary search to look for T-x. This will take O(nlogn).
So, overall search is O(n log n)
Approach 3 :
The best way
would be to insert every element into a hash table (without sorting). This takes O(n) as constant time insertion.
Then for every x,
we can just look up its complement, T-x, which is O(1).
Overall the run time of this approach is O(n).
You can refer more here.Thanks.
# Let arr be the given array.
# And K be the give sum
for i=0 to arr.length - 1 do
# key is the element and value is its index.
hash(arr[i]) = i
end-for
for i=0 to arr.length - 1 do
# if K-th element exists and it's different then we found a pair
if hash(K - arr[i]) != i
print "pair i , hash(K - arr[i]) has sum K"
end-if
end-for
Implementation in Java : Using codaddict's algorithm (Maybe slightly different)
import java.util.HashMap;
public class ArrayPairSum {
public static void main(String[] args) {
int []a = {2,45,7,3,5,1,8,9};
printSumPairs(a,10);
}
public static void printSumPairs(int []input, int k){
Map<Integer, Integer> pairs = new HashMap<Integer, Integer>();
for(int i=0;i<input.length;i++){
if(pairs.containsKey(input[i]))
System.out.println(input[i] +", "+ pairs.get(input[i]));
else
pairs.put(k-input[i], input[i]);
}
}
}
For input = {2,45,7,3,5,1,8,9} and if Sum is 10
Output pairs:
3,7
8,2
9,1
Some notes about the solution :
We iterate only once through the array --> O(n) time
Insertion and lookup time in Hash is O(1).
Overall time is O(n), although it uses extra space in terms of hash.
Solution in java. You can add all the String elements to an ArrayList of strings and return the list. Here I am just printing it out.
void numberPairsForSum(int[] array, int sum) {
HashSet<Integer> set = new HashSet<Integer>();
for (int num : array) {
if (set.contains(sum - num)) {
String s = num + ", " + (sum - num) + " add up to " + sum;
System.out.println(s);
}
set.add(num);
}
}
Python Implementation:
import itertools
list = [1, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5,]
uniquelist = set(list)
targetsum = 5
for n in itertools.combinations(uniquelist, 2):
if n[0] + n[1] == targetsum:
print str(n[0]) + " + " + str(n[1])
Output:
1 + 4
2 + 3
C++11, run time complexity O(n):
#include <vector>
#include <unordered_map>
#include <utility>
std::vector<std::pair<int, int>> FindPairsForSum(
const std::vector<int>& data, const int& sum)
{
std::unordered_map<int, size_t> umap;
std::vector<std::pair<int, int>> result;
for (size_t i = 0; i < data.size(); ++i)
{
if (0 < umap.count(sum - data[i]))
{
size_t j = umap[sum - data[i]];
result.push_back({data[i], data[j]});
}
else
{
umap[data[i]] = i;
}
}
return result;
}
Here is a solution witch takes into account duplicate entries. It is written in javascript and assumes array is sorted. The solution runs in O(n) time and does not use any extra memory aside from variable.
var count_pairs = function(_arr,x) {
if(!x) x = 0;
var pairs = 0;
var i = 0;
var k = _arr.length-1;
if((k+1)<2) return pairs;
var halfX = x/2;
while(i<k) {
var curK = _arr[k];
var curI = _arr[i];
var pairsThisLoop = 0;
if(curK+curI==x) {
// if midpoint and equal find combinations
if(curK==curI) {
var comb = 1;
while(--k>=i) pairs+=(comb++);
break;
}
// count pair and k duplicates
pairsThisLoop++;
while(_arr[--k]==curK) pairsThisLoop++;
// add k side pairs to running total for every i side pair found
pairs+=pairsThisLoop;
while(_arr[++i]==curI) pairs+=pairsThisLoop;
} else {
// if we are at a mid point
if(curK==curI) break;
var distK = Math.abs(halfX-curK);
var distI = Math.abs(halfX-curI);
if(distI > distK) while(_arr[++i]==curI);
else while(_arr[--k]==curK);
}
}
return pairs;
}
I solved this during an interview for a large corporation. They took it but not me.
So here it is for everyone.
Start at both side of the array and slowly work your way inwards making sure to count duplicates if they exist.
It only counts pairs but can be reworked to
find the pairs
find pairs < x
find pairs > x
Enjoy!
O(n)
def find_pairs(L,sum):
s = set(L)
edgeCase = sum/2
if L.count(edgeCase) ==2:
print edgeCase, edgeCase
s.remove(edgeCase)
for i in s:
diff = sum-i
if diff in s:
print i, diff
L = [2,45,7,3,5,1,8,9]
sum = 10
find_pairs(L,sum)
Methodology: a + b = c, so instead of looking for (a,b) we look for a = c -
b
Implementation in Java : Using codaddict's algorithm:
import java.util.Hashtable;
public class Range {
public static void main(String[] args) {
// TODO Auto-generated method stub
Hashtable mapping = new Hashtable();
int a[]= {80,79,82,81,84,83,85};
int k = 160;
for (int i=0; i < a.length; i++){
mapping.put(a[i], i);
}
for (int i=0; i < a.length; i++){
if (mapping.containsKey(k - a[i]) && (Integer)mapping.get(k-a[i]) != i){
System.out.println(k-a[i]+", "+ a[i]);
}
}
}
}
Output:
81, 79
79, 81
If you want duplicate pairs (eg: 80,80) also then just remove && (Integer)mapping.get(k-a[i]) != i from the if condition and you are good to go.
Just attended this question on HackerRank and here's my 'Objective C' Solution:
-(NSNumber*)sum:(NSArray*) a andK:(NSNumber*)k {
NSMutableDictionary *dict = [NSMutableDictionary dictionary];
long long count = 0;
for(long i=0;i<a.count;i++){
if(dict[a[i]]) {
count++;
NSLog(#"a[i]: %#, dict[array[i]]: %#", a[i], dict[a[i]]);
}
else{
NSNumber *calcNum = #(k.longLongValue-((NSNumber*)a[i]).longLongValue);
dict[calcNum] = a[i];
}
}
return #(count);
}
Hope it helps someone.
this is the implementation of O(n*lg n) using binary search implementation inside a loop.
#include <iostream>
using namespace std;
bool *inMemory;
int pairSum(int arr[], int n, int k)
{
int count = 0;
if(n==0)
return count;
for (int i = 0; i < n; ++i)
{
int start = 0;
int end = n-1;
while(start <= end)
{
int mid = start + (end-start)/2;
if(i == mid)
break;
else if((arr[i] + arr[mid]) == k && !inMemory[i] && !inMemory[mid])
{
count++;
inMemory[i] = true;
inMemory[mid] = true;
}
else if(arr[i] + arr[mid] >= k)
{
end = mid-1;
}
else
start = mid+1;
}
}
return count;
}
int main()
{
int arr[] = {1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10};
inMemory = new bool[10];
for (int i = 0; i < 10; ++i)
{
inMemory[i] = false;
}
cout << pairSum(arr, 10, 11) << endl;
return 0;
}
In python
arr = [1, 2, 4, 6, 10]
diff_hash = {}
expected_sum = 3
for i in arr:
if diff_hash.has_key(i):
print i, diff_hash[i]
key = expected_sum - i
diff_hash[key] = i
Nice solution from Codeaddict. I took the liberty of implementing a version of it in Ruby:
def find_sum(arr,sum)
result ={}
h = Hash[arr.map {|i| [i,i]}]
arr.each { |l| result[l] = sum-l if h[sum-l] && !result[sum-l] }
result
end
To allow duplicate pairs (1,5), (5,1) we just have to remove the && !result[sum-l] instruction
Here is Java code for three approaches:
1. Using Map O(n), HashSet can also be used here.
2. Sort array and then use BinarySearch to look for complement O(nLog(n))
3. Traditional BruteForce two loops O(n^2)
public class PairsEqualToSum {
public static void main(String[] args) {
int a[] = {1,10,5,8,2,12,6,4};
findPairs1(a,10);
findPairs2(a,10);
findPairs3(a,10);
}
//Method1 - O(N) use a Map to insert values as keys & check for number's complement in map
static void findPairs1(int[]a, int sum){
Map<Integer, Integer> pairs = new HashMap<Integer, Integer>();
for(int i=0; i<a.length; i++){
if(pairs.containsKey(sum-a[i]))
System.out.println("("+a[i]+","+(sum-a[i])+")");
else
pairs.put(a[i], 0);
}
}
//Method2 - O(nlog(n)) using Sort
static void findPairs2(int[]a, int sum){
Arrays.sort(a);
for(int i=0; i<a.length/2; i++){
int complement = sum - a[i];
int foundAtIndex = Arrays.binarySearch(a,complement);
if(foundAtIndex >0 && foundAtIndex != i) //to avoid situation where binarySearch would find the original and not the complement like "5"
System.out.println("("+a[i]+","+(sum-a[i])+")");
}
}
//Method 3 - Brute Force O(n^2)
static void findPairs3(int[]a, int sum){
for(int i=0; i<a.length; i++){
for(int j=i; j<a.length;j++){
if(a[i]+a[j] == sum)
System.out.println("("+a[i]+","+a[j]+")");
}
}
}
}
A Simple program in java for arrays having unique elements:
import java.util.*;
public class ArrayPairSum {
public static void main(String[] args) {
int []a = {2,4,7,3,5,1,8,9,5};
sumPairs(a,10);
}
public static void sumPairs(int []input, int k){
Set<Integer> set = new HashSet<Integer>();
for(int i=0;i<input.length;i++){
if(set.contains(input[i]))
System.out.println(input[i] +", "+(k-input[i]));
else
set.add(k-input[i]);
}
}
}
A simple Java code snippet for printing the pairs below:
public static void count_all_pairs_with_given_sum(int arr[], int S){
if(arr.length < 2){
return;
}
HashSet values = new HashSet(arr.length);
for(int value : arr)values.add(value);
for(int value : arr){
int difference = S - value;
if(values.contains(difference) && value<difference){
System.out.printf("(%d, %d) %n", value, difference);
}
}
}
Another solution in Swift: the idea is to create an hash that store values of (sum - currentValue) and compare this to the current value of the loop. The complexity is O(n).
func findPair(list: [Int], _ sum: Int) -> [(Int, Int)]? {
var hash = Set<Int>() //save list of value of sum - item.
var dictCount = [Int: Int]() //to avoid the case A*2 = sum where we have only one A in the array
var foundKeys = Set<Int>() //to avoid duplicated pair in the result.
var result = [(Int, Int)]() //this is for the result.
for item in list {
//keep track of count of each element to avoid problem: [2, 3, 5], 10 -> result = (5,5)
if (!dictCount.keys.contains(item)) {
dictCount[item] = 1
} else {
dictCount[item] = dictCount[item]! + 1
}
//if my hash does not contain the (sum - item) value -> insert to hash.
if !hash.contains(sum-item) {
hash.insert(sum-item)
}
//check if current item is the same as another hash value or not, if yes, return the tuple.
if hash.contains(item) &&
(dictCount[item] > 1 || sum != item*2) // check if we have item*2 = sum or not.
{
if !foundKeys.contains(item) && !foundKeys.contains(sum-item) {
foundKeys.insert(item) //add to found items in order to not to add duplicated pair.
result.append((item, sum-item))
}
}
}
return result
}
//test:
let a = findPair([2,3,5,4,1,7,6,8,9,5,3,3,3,3,3,3,3,3,3], 14) //will return (8,6) and (9,5)
My Solution - Java - Without duplicates
public static void printAllPairSum(int[] a, int x){
System.out.printf("printAllPairSum(%s,%d)\n", Arrays.toString(a),x);
if(a==null||a.length==0){
return;
}
int length = a.length;
Map<Integer,Integer> reverseMapOfArray = new HashMap<>(length,1.0f);
for (int i = 0; i < length; i++) {
reverseMapOfArray.put(a[i], i);
}
for (int i = 0; i < length; i++) {
Integer j = reverseMapOfArray.get(x - a[i]);
if(j!=null && i<j){
System.out.printf("a[%d] + a[%d] = %d + %d = %d\n",i,j,a[i],a[j],x);
}
}
System.out.println("------------------------------");
}
This prints the pairs and avoids duplicates using bitwise manipulation.
public static void findSumHashMap(int[] arr, int key) {
Map<Integer, Integer> valMap = new HashMap<Integer, Integer>();
for(int i=0;i<arr.length;i++)
valMap.put(arr[i], i);
int indicesVisited = 0;
for(int i=0;i<arr.length;i++) {
if(valMap.containsKey(key - arr[i]) && valMap.get(key - arr[i]) != i) {
if(!((indicesVisited & ((1<<i) | (1<<valMap.get(key - arr[i])))) > 0)) {
int diff = key-arr[i];
System.out.println(arr[i] + " " +diff);
indicesVisited = indicesVisited | (1<<i) | (1<<valMap.get(key - arr[i]));
}
}
}
}
I bypassed the bit manuplation and just compared the index values. This is less than the loop iteration value (i in this case). This will not print the duplicate pairs and duplicate array elements also.
public static void findSumHashMap(int[] arr, int key) {
Map<Integer, Integer> valMap = new HashMap<Integer, Integer>();
for (int i = 0; i < arr.length; i++) {
valMap.put(arr[i], i);
}
for (int i = 0; i < arr.length; i++) {
if (valMap.containsKey(key - arr[i])
&& valMap.get(key - arr[i]) != i) {
if (valMap.get(key - arr[i]) < i) {
int diff = key - arr[i];
System.out.println(arr[i] + " " + diff);
}
}
}
}
in C#:
int[] array = new int[] { 1, 5, 7, 2, 9, 8, 4, 3, 6 }; // given array
int sum = 10; // given sum
for (int i = 0; i <= array.Count() - 1; i++)
if (array.Contains(sum - array[i]))
Console.WriteLine("{0}, {1}", array[i], sum - array[i]);
One Solution can be this, but not optimul (The complexity of this code is O(n^2)):
public class FindPairsEqualToSum {
private static int inputSum = 0;
public static List<String> findPairsForSum(int[] inputArray, int sum) {
List<String> list = new ArrayList<String>();
List<Integer> inputList = new ArrayList<Integer>();
for (int i : inputArray) {
inputList.add(i);
}
for (int i : inputArray) {
int tempInt = sum - i;
if (inputList.contains(tempInt)) {
String pair = String.valueOf(i + ", " + tempInt);
list.add(pair);
}
}
return list;
}
}
A simple python version of the code that find a pair sum of zero and can be modify to find k:
def sumToK(lst):
k = 0 # <- define the k here
d = {} # build a dictionary
# build the hashmap key = val of lst, value = i
for index, val in enumerate(lst):
d[val] = index
# find the key; if a key is in the dict, and not the same index as the current key
for i, val in enumerate(lst):
if (k-val) in d and d[k-val] != i:
return True
return False
The run time complexity of the function is O(n) and Space: O(n) as well.
public static int[] f (final int[] nums, int target) {
int[] r = new int[2];
r[0] = -1;
r[1] = -1;
int[] vIndex = new int[0Xfff];
for (int i = 0; i < nums.length; i++) {
int delta = 0Xff;
int gapIndex = target - nums[i] + delta;
if (vIndex[gapIndex] != 0) {
r[0] = vIndex[gapIndex];
r[1] = i + 1;
return r;
} else {
vIndex[nums[i] + delta] = i + 1;
}
}
return r;
}
less than o(n) solution will be=>
function(array,k)
var map = {};
for element in array
map(element) = true;
if(map(k-element))
return {k,element}
Solution in Python using list comprehension
f= [[i,j] for i in list for j in list if j+i==X];
O(N2)
also gives two ordered pairs- (a,b) and (b,a) as well
I can do it in O(n). Let me know when you want the answer. Note it involves simply traversing the array once with no sorting, etc... I should mention too that it exploits commutativity of addition and doesn't use hashes but wastes memory.
using System;
using System.Collections.Generic;
/*
An O(n) approach exists by using a lookup table. The approach is to store the value in a "bin" that can easily be looked up(e.g., O(1)) if it is a candidate for an appropriate sum.
e.g.,
for each a[k] in the array we simply put the it in another array at the location x - a[k].
Suppose we have [0, 1, 5, 3, 6, 9, 8, 7] and x = 9
We create a new array,
indexes value
9 - 0 = 9 0
9 - 1 = 8 1
9 - 5 = 4 5
9 - 3 = 6 3
9 - 6 = 3 6
9 - 9 = 0 9
9 - 8 = 1 8
9 - 7 = 2 7
THEN the only values that matter are the ones who have an index into the new table.
So, say when we reach 9 or equal we see if our new array has the index 9 - 9 = 0. Since it does we know that all the values it contains will add to 9. (note in this cause it's obvious there is only 1 possible one but it might have multiple index values in it which we need to store).
So effectively what we end up doing is only having to move through the array once. Because addition is commutative we will end up with all the possible results.
For example, when we get to 6 we get the index into our new table as 9 - 6 = 3. Since the table contains that index value we know the values.
This is essentially trading off speed for memory.
*/
namespace sum
{
class Program
{
static void Main(string[] args)
{
int num = 25;
int X = 10;
var arr = new List<int>();
for(int i = 0; i <= num; i++) arr.Add((new Random((int)(DateTime.Now.Ticks + i*num))).Next(0, num*2));
Console.Write("["); for (int i = 0; i < num - 1; i++) Console.Write(arr[i] + ", "); Console.WriteLine(arr[arr.Count-1] + "] - " + X);
var arrbrute = new List<Tuple<int,int>>();
var arrfast = new List<Tuple<int,int>>();
for(int i = 0; i < num; i++)
for(int j = i+1; j < num; j++)
if (arr[i] + arr[j] == X)
arrbrute.Add(new Tuple<int, int>(arr[i], arr[j]));
int M = 500;
var lookup = new List<List<int>>();
for(int i = 0; i < 1000; i++) lookup.Add(new List<int>());
for(int i = 0; i < num; i++)
{
// Check and see if we have any "matches"
if (lookup[M + X - arr[i]].Count != 0)
{
foreach(var j in lookup[M + X - arr[i]])
arrfast.Add(new Tuple<int, int>(arr[i], arr[j]));
}
lookup[M + arr[i]].Add(i);
}
for(int i = 0; i < arrbrute.Count; i++)
Console.WriteLine(arrbrute[i].Item1 + " + " + arrbrute[i].Item2 + " = " + X);
Console.WriteLine("---------");
for(int i = 0; i < arrfast.Count; i++)
Console.WriteLine(arrfast[i].Item1 + " + " + arrfast[i].Item2 + " = " + X);
Console.ReadKey();
}
}
}
I implemented logic in Scala with out a Map. It gives duplicate pairs since the counter loops thru entire elements of the array. If duplicate pairs are needed, you can simply return the value pc
val arr = Array[Int](8, 7, 2, 5, 3, 1, 5)
val num = 10
var pc = 0
for(i <- arr.indices) {
if(arr.contains(Math.abs(arr(i) - num))) pc += 1
}
println(s"Pairs: ${pc/2}")
It is working with duplicates values in the array as well.
GOLANG Implementation
func findPairs(slice1 []int, sum int) [][]int {
pairMap := make(map[int]int)
var SliceOfPairs [][]int
for i, v := range slice1 {
if valuei, ok := pairMap[v]; ok {
//fmt.Println("Pair Found", i, valuei)
SliceOfPairs = append(SliceOfPairs, []int{i, valuei})
} else {
pairMap[sum-v] = i
}
}
return SliceOfPairs
}
function findPairOfNumbers(arr, targetSum) {
arr = arr.sort();
var low = 0, high = arr.length - 1, sum, result = [];
while(low < high) {
sum = arr[low] + arr[high];
if(sum < targetSum)
low++;
else if(sum > targetSum)
high--;
else if(sum === targetSum) {
result.push({val1: arr[low], val2: arr[high]});
high--;
}
}
return (result || false);
}
var pairs = findPairOfNumbers([1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,0], 7);
if(pairs.length) {
console.log(pairs);
} else {
console.log("No pair of numbers found that sums to " + 7);
}
Can someone give an example for finding greatest common divisor algorithm for more than two numbers?
I believe programming language doesn't matter.
Start with the first pair and get their GCD, then take the GCD of that result and the next number. The obvious optimization is you can stop if the running GCD ever reaches 1. I'm watching this one to see if there are any other optimizations. :)
Oh, and this can be easily parallelized since the operations are commutative/associative.
The GCD of 3 numbers can be computed as gcd(a, b, c) = gcd(gcd(a, b), c). You can apply the Euclidean algorithm, the extended Euclidian or the binary GCD algorithm iteratively and get your answer. I'm not aware of any other (smarter?) ways to find a GCD, unfortunately.
A little late to the party I know, but a simple JavaScript implementation, utilising Sam Harwell's description of the algorithm:
function euclideanAlgorithm(a, b) {
if(b === 0) {
return a;
}
const remainder = a % b;
return euclideanAlgorithm(b, remainder)
}
function gcdMultipleNumbers(...args) { //ES6 used here, change as appropriate
const gcd = args.reduce((memo, next) => {
return euclideanAlgorithm(memo, next)}
);
return gcd;
}
gcdMultipleNumbers(48,16,24,96) //8
I just updated a Wiki page on this.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Binary_GCD_algorithm#C.2B.2B_template_class]
This takes an arbitrary number of terms.
use GCD(5, 2, 30, 25, 90, 12);
template<typename AType> AType GCD(int nargs, ...)
{
va_list arglist;
va_start(arglist, nargs);
AType *terms = new AType[nargs];
// put values into an array
for (int i = 0; i < nargs; i++)
{
terms[i] = va_arg(arglist, AType);
if (terms[i] < 0)
{
va_end(arglist);
return (AType)0;
}
}
va_end(arglist);
int shift = 0;
int numEven = 0;
int numOdd = 0;
int smallindex = -1;
do
{
numEven = 0;
numOdd = 0;
smallindex = -1;
// count number of even and odd
for (int i = 0; i < nargs; i++)
{
if (terms[i] == 0)
continue;
if (terms[i] & 1)
numOdd++;
else
numEven++;
if ((smallindex < 0) || terms[i] < terms[smallindex])
{
smallindex = i;
}
}
// check for exit
if (numEven + numOdd == 1)
continue;
// If everything in S is even, divide everything in S by 2, and then multiply the final answer by 2 at the end.
if (numOdd == 0)
{
shift++;
for (int i = 0; i < nargs; i++)
{
if (terms[i] == 0)
continue;
terms[i] >>= 1;
}
}
// If some numbers in S are even and some are odd, divide all the even numbers by 2.
if (numEven > 0 && numOdd > 0)
{
for (int i = 0; i < nargs; i++)
{
if (terms[i] == 0)
continue;
if ((terms[i] & 1) == 0)
terms[i] >>= 1;
}
}
//If every number in S is odd, then choose an arbitrary element of S and call it k.
//Replace every other element, say n, with | nāk | / 2.
if (numEven == 0)
{
for (int i = 0; i < nargs; i++)
{
if (i == smallindex || terms[i] == 0)
continue;
terms[i] = abs(terms[i] - terms[smallindex]) >> 1;
}
}
} while (numEven + numOdd > 1);
// only one remaining element multiply the final answer by 2s at the end.
for (int i = 0; i < nargs; i++)
{
if (terms[i] == 0)
continue;
return terms[i] << shift;
}
return 0;
};
For golang, using remainder
func GetGCD(a, b int) int {
for b != 0 {
a, b = b, a%b
}
return a
}
func GetGCDFromList(numbers []int) int {
var gdc = numbers[0]
for i := 1; i < len(numbers); i++ {
number := numbers[i]
gdc = GetGCD(gdc, number)
}
return gdc
}
In Java (not optimal):
public static int GCD(int[] a){
int j = 0;
boolean b=true;
for (int i = 1; i < a.length; i++) {
if(a[i]!=a[i-1]){
b=false;
break;
}
}
if(b)return a[0];
j=LeastNonZero(a);
System.out.println(j);
for (int i = 0; i < a.length; i++) {
if(a[i]!=j)a[i]=a[i]-j;
}
System.out.println(Arrays.toString(a));
return GCD(a);
}
public static int LeastNonZero(int[] a){
int b = 0;
for (int i : a) {
if(i!=0){
if(b==0||i<b)b=i;
}
}
return b;
}