假设您在Java中有一个链表结构。它由节点组成:
class Node {
Node next;
// some user data
}
每个节点都指向下一个节点,除了最后一个节点,它的next为空。假设有一种可能性,列表可以包含一个循环-即最后的节点,而不是有一个空值,有一个引用到列表中它之前的一个节点。
最好的写作方式是什么
boolean hasLoop(Node first)
如果给定的节点是带有循环的列表的第一个,则返回true,否则返回false ?你怎么能写出一个常数的空间和合理的时间呢?
下面是一个带有循环的列表的图片:
public boolean hasLoop(Node start){
TreeSet<Node> set = new TreeSet<Node>();
Node lookingAt = start;
while (lookingAt.peek() != null){
lookingAt = lookingAt.next;
if (set.contains(lookingAt){
return false;
} else {
set.put(lookingAt);
}
return true;
}
// Inside our Node class:
public Node peek(){
return this.next;
}
请原谅我的无知(我对Java和编程仍然相当陌生),但为什么上面的方法不能工作呢?
I guess this doesn't solve the constant space issue... but it does at least get there in a reasonable time, correct? It will only take the space of the linked list plus the space of a set with n elements (where n is the number of elements in the linked list, or the number of elements until it reaches a loop). And for time, worst-case analysis, I think, would suggest O(nlog(n)). SortedSet look-ups for contains() are log(n) (check the javadoc, but I'm pretty sure TreeSet's underlying structure is TreeMap, whose in turn is a red-black tree), and in the worst case (no loops, or loop at very end), it will have to do n look-ups.
乌龟和兔子
看看波拉德的算法。这不是完全相同的问题,但也许你会理解其中的逻辑,并将其应用于链表。
(如果你很懒,你可以看看周期检测——看看关于乌龟和兔子的那部分。)
这只需要线性时间和2个额外的指针。
在Java中:
boolean hasLoop( Node first ) {
if ( first == null ) return false;
Node turtle = first;
Node hare = first;
while ( hare.next != null && hare.next.next != null ) {
turtle = turtle.next;
hare = hare.next.next;
if ( turtle == hare ) return true;
}
return false;
}
(大多数解决方案不会同时检查next和next。接下来是null。此外,因为乌龟总是在后面,你不需要检查它是否为空——兔子已经检查过了。)
在这个上下文中,到处都有文本材料的加载。我只是想张贴一个图表表示,真正帮助我掌握概念。
当快、慢在点p相遇时,
快速行进的距离= a+b+c+b = a+2b+c
慢行距离= a+b
因为快的比慢的快2倍。
所以a+2b+c = 2(a+b)然后得到a=c。
因此,当另一个慢指针再次从头部运行到q时,同时,快速指针将从p运行到q,因此它们在q点会合。
public ListNode detectCycle(ListNode head) {
if(head == null || head.next==null)
return null;
ListNode slow = head;
ListNode fast = head;
while (fast!=null && fast.next!=null){
fast = fast.next.next;
slow = slow.next;
/*
if the 2 pointers meet, then the
dist from the meeting pt to start of loop
equals
dist from head to start of loop
*/
if (fast == slow){ //loop found
slow = head;
while(slow != fast){
slow = slow.next;
fast = fast.next;
}
return slow;
}
}
return null;
}
乌龟和兔子的另一种解决方案,不太好,因为我暂时改变了列表:
这个想法是遍历列表,并在执行过程中反转它。然后,当你第一次到达一个已经被访问过的节点时,它的next指针将指向“向后”,导致迭代再次朝第一个方向进行,并在那里终止。
Node prev = null;
Node cur = first;
while (cur != null) {
Node next = cur.next;
cur.next = prev;
prev = cur;
cur = next;
}
boolean hasCycle = prev == first && first != null && first.next != null;
// reconstruct the list
cur = prev;
prev = null;
while (cur != null) {
Node next = cur.next;
cur.next = prev;
prev = cur;
cur = next;
}
return hasCycle;
测试代码:
static void assertSameOrder(Node[] nodes) {
for (int i = 0; i < nodes.length - 1; i++) {
assert nodes[i].next == nodes[i + 1];
}
}
public static void main(String[] args) {
Node[] nodes = new Node[100];
for (int i = 0; i < nodes.length; i++) {
nodes[i] = new Node();
}
for (int i = 0; i < nodes.length - 1; i++) {
nodes[i].next = nodes[i + 1];
}
Node first = nodes[0];
Node max = nodes[nodes.length - 1];
max.next = null;
assert !hasCycle(first);
assertSameOrder(nodes);
max.next = first;
assert hasCycle(first);
assertSameOrder(nodes);
max.next = max;
assert hasCycle(first);
assertSameOrder(nodes);
max.next = nodes[50];
assert hasCycle(first);
assertSameOrder(nodes);
}