-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 34
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
FIRE - ALICE D #21
base: master
Are you sure you want to change the base?
FIRE - ALICE D #21
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Great work Alice, I did leave one comment on the max subarray, but it all works. Well done.
while i < nums.length do | ||
array_of_max_sum_ending_in_i[i] = [array_of_max_sum_ending_in_i[i - 1] + nums[i], nums[i]].max | ||
i += 1 | ||
end |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Wow, so compact!
# Time Complexity: O(n) | ||
# Space Complexity: O(n) | ||
def max_sub_array(nums) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This works, but you can actually do it without the array. You only need to keep track of the max subarray ending at the current index and the max subarray seen so far.
It's kind of like the fibonacci problem.
That said your time complexity is great.
# Time complexity: O(n) | ||
# Space Complexity: O(n) | ||
def newman_conway(num) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
👍
Thanks for reviewing it! :)