I am trying to implement the deletion function in
public static boolean delete(Object d, ListElement head){
ListElement p=find(d,head);
if(p.data==null){return false;}
else {
System.out.println("Delete Successfully!");
if(head.data==d){head=head.next;}
else{
while(head.next.data!=d){
head=head.next;
}
head.next=head.next.next;}
return true;}
}
This function basically check if the element d is in the list,
-if not->return false;
-else check whether the element is the first element of the list, if true, change the head to its next,
-else traverse to the list element in front of it.
The problem is case the element to delete is the first element, such as boolean s=ListElement.delete(1,d); I cannot use "head=head.next;" to assign new value to head. But java is passed by reference, why cannot I change that?
//actually I found my question is whether we can change the reference passed to the function inside the function
like:
void fun(dog a){
a=new dog("Po");
}
main()
{dog b=new dog("Jo");fun(b);}
//so will b be changed?
The reference to the first list element is either held by the list object itself or by an "invisible" root element (in case of single linked list).
So you either have to pass the entire list to the method or, if you have that invisible root, pass the root as head.
public static boolean delete(Object d, MyLinkedList<ListElement> list) {
ListElement head = list.getHead();
if (head.data.equals(d)) { // <- ALWAYS use equals, never == to compare objects!!
list.setHead(head.next);
} else {
ListElement element = head.next;
// ... the rest is similiar to your algorithm
}
}
The Java Pass by Reference idea means, that when you call a method, and give some object as an argument, you'll get a new reference pointing to the same object.
Altering values, will change the object, in turn also affecting other references. But if you give a new value to the parameter, only that will be changed, to point to some different object. (It's worth mentioning that there are languages that do allow changing the argument, to change the first passed parameter.)
void delete(visit_ptr_node_type this_is_the_node)
{
visit_ptr_node_type one_back;
if(anchor == NULL)
printf("\n The list is empty");
else
{
if(this_is_the_node==anchor)
anchor=anchor->next_ptr;
else
{
one_back=anchor;
while(one_back->next_ptr != this_is_the_node)
one_back=one_back->next_ptr;
one_back->next_ptr = (this_is_the_node) ->next_ptr;
}
free(this_is_the_node);
}
}
Related
Alright, so cut a long story short, what I'm trying to do here is remove all instances of value e from a doubly linked list. As far as I know, my logic is at least mostly right, but for some off reason it isn't actually removing any of the nodes in my test cases.
public boolean removeAll(int e) {
DIntNode dummy = head,next = null;
if (head == null)
return false;
while (dummy != null) {
if (dummy.getData() == e) {
next = dummy.getNext();
dummy.getNext().setPrev(null);
dummy = next;
return true;
}
else
dummy = dummy.getNext();
}
return false;
}
This is what I currently have for my code of the metho. My logic here was to use a dummy DIntNode that starts at the head and a "next" node to help me shrink the list, so to speak. In other words, if the list was something like "1<-> 1 <-> 2 <-> 3", the function would change it to "2<->3", in theory. The reason this is a boolean function is because I'm required to return true if the given value is removed form the list.
Is there just another step in the logic that I'm missing, or is the methodology itself just unreliable? I'm very unsure at this point, so any and all help would be greatly appreciated.
You set
dummy.getNext().setPrev(null);
But previous node also have reference to next node you try to remove. You should set this reference to next active value.
That because when you want to get all linked list previous value still know about node you remove, because of next node reference
You can try with the following code:
if (dummy.getData() == e) {
DIntNode temp = dummy.getPrevious();
temp.next = dummy.getNext();
temp = dummy.getNext();
temp.previous = dummy.getPrevious();
return true;
}
This used the previous reference. So the previous node will now have reference to the next node of your dummy node (node to be deleted). And similarly, the next node of dummy node will have reference of previous node of your dummy node. So, the dummy node will loose its connection/link from its doubly link list and that's what we want!
Please try.
Two issues with the code:
When relinking a doubly linked list, where removing B from A - B - C, you need to set the next node for A to be C as well as the previous node for C to be A. With trying to keep you method names:
A.setNext(current.getNext());
C.setNext(current.getPrev());
With your code, if you find an occurrence, you return, which means that no other instances will be removed since you jump out of that method. You will probably need a new boolean removed variable, that is set to false, return true changed to removed = true and return false changed to return removed.
The method exits after the first encounter of 'e'.
If you want to remove all instances of 'e', then you should have something like this:
boolean listChanged = false;
while (dummy != null) {
if (dummy.getData() == e) {
// update list
...
listChanged = true;
}
...
}
return listChanged;
Also, you should not write your code like this:
dummy.getNext().setPrev(...); // throws NPE if next is null
I'm trying to used recursive method to complete the addLast method in a singly linked list, however, the code gives me a wrong output of list.size() = 2 and list.getFirst() = 5. The reason should be due to the line
SLList p=this;
It seems changing p reference changes "this" reference as well, which is not so logic to me. Could anyone give some details about this? Thx
public class SLList {
public class IntNode {
public int item;
public IntNode next;
public IntNode(int i, IntNode n) {
item = i;
next = n;
}
}
private IntNode first;
public SLList(int x) {
first = new IntNode(x, null);
}
/** Adds an item to the front of the list. */
public void addFirst(int x) {
first = new IntNode(x, first);
}
/** Retrieves the front item from the list. */
public int getFirst() {
return first.item;
}
/** Adds an item to the end of the list. */
public void addLast(int x) {
SLList p = this;
if (p.first. next == null) {
p.first.next = new IntNode (x, null);
}
else {
p.first = p.first.next;
p.addLast(x);
}
}
/** Returns the number of items in the list using recursion. */
public int size() {
/* Your Code Here! */
SLList p = this;
if (p.first == null) {
return 0;
}
else if (p.first.next == null){
return 1;
}
else {
p.first = p.first.next;
return 1 + p.size();
}
}
public static void main (String[] args) {
SLList list=new SLList (5);
list.addFirst(10);
list.addFirst(15);
list.addLast(17);
System.out.println(list.getFirst());
System.out.println(list.size());
}
}
The problem is nothing to do with the assignment of this. Nothing can change this. Period.
(But things can change the state of the object that this refers to.)
The real problem is in your implementation of the size method. Your size method is causing the list to change. It shouldn't. In your case, the change causes:
the size() method to return the wrong value
subsequent getFirst() calls to return the wrong value.
I won't say exactly where the bug, but you should be able to spot it yourself by a process of elimination. (Or if that fails, use a debugger and try to observe where the list is changing.)
There are bigger problems with your algorithms than you think. size() is incorrect. You can fix this if you realize that you need to count the number of IntNode objects in the list. Similarly all other methods need to manipulate IntNode objects.
SLList p = this;
p reference to the same SLList object. if you make any changes to 'p' then it will also happened to 'this', becuase of reference type (not value type).
Here in the statement
p.first = p.first.next;
the reference to the first is changed when you call 'addLast' method. You loss the reference to the first item.
If you remove the line
list.addLast(17);
in main method you will see the correct answer. The problem is with this method.
Change the method as follow and add the new method below.
/** Adds an item to the end of the list. */
public void addLast(int x) {
addLast(x, this.first);
}
private void addLast(int x, IntNode node){
if(node.next == null){
node.next = new IntNode (x, null);
}else {
node = node.next;
addLast(x, node);
}
}
Then you will not lose the reference to first item and now it works fine,
Problem in your implementation is addLast and size method are changing the value of field variable first.
It don't matter whether you assignthis to some variable or use directly.
Because assigning this to some variable does not create new this object but assign's reference to that variable.
So you should first copy value of first field variable to some local variable then iterate on it.In this way your first will not change.
Hint: Don't change the first variable reference.
Your addLast() and size() changes value of first which is wrong.
Problem is in this line.
p.first = p.first.next;
I am using a recursive method to find a node in a binary tree using a key. When I find the node, I set it to my reference variable foundNode and return. The problem is that when I read the object its value is still null. Can anybody help?
findGivenNode(root, key, foundNode, parentStack);
private boolean findGivenNode(Node node, int key, Node foundNode, Stack<Node> parentStack) {
if (node == null) {
return false;
}
parentStack.add(node);
if (node.getData() == key) {
foundNode = node;
return true;
}
boolean leftReturn = findGivenNode(node.getLeftChild(), key, foundNode, parentStack);
boolean RightReturn = findGivenNode(node.getRightChild(), key, foundNode, parentStack);
if (leftReturn || RightReturn) {
return true;
} else {
parentStack.pop();
return false;
}
}
Java doesn't pass arguments by reference, they are passed by value. Read more here
Let's clarify by an example. Make the key you are looking for be integer with value 21.
The situation at the beginning of the function is the following:
So now, when you say:
foundNode = node; // this doesn't reflect outside of the method
You are changing the value of foundNode locally inside the findGivenNode() method, it doesn't apply to outside this method. Basically, the local variable called foundNode references the node you want to change and then you make this local variable foundNode reference the new node by the statement above.
This change is reflected only inside the function. As soon as your function is finished, local variables don't exist anymore so neither does this local version of foundNode. Visual result:
The simple solution is to use a Wrapper function
To keep track of the reference, you can make a simple wrapper class that will store the reference you want:
private class NodeWrapper {
Node foundNode;
NodeWrapper() {
foundNode = null;
}
}
Then you can create a new NodeWrapper and pass that into your function instead of foundNode
NodeWrapper wrapper = new NodeWrapper();
findGivenNode(root, wrapper, key, parentStack);
Then inside your function instead of:
foundNode = node;
You say:
wrapper.foundNode = node;
This way you can maintain the reference throughout the recursion inside the NodeWrapper. Meaning:
NodeWrapper wrapper = new NodeWrapper();
findGivenNode(root, wrapper, key, parentStack);
// at this point, wrapper.foundNode will hold the reference to the node you need
// or null if the node wasn't found
On another note, above the method you have this function prototype:
findGivenNode(root, key, foundNode, parentStack);
Seems like someone is still used to C/C++ :)
This is unnecessary in Java, you can read this question thread for reasoning behind that or just Google it.
I came across the following problem:
Delete a node in the middle of a singly linked list, given only access to that node. (head is not given)
Now there are a lot of solutions and they all do not work when the element to be deleted is the last node.
Why wouldn't this work?
public static void removeNode (Node n){
if(n.next == null){ //n is the last node
n= null;
return;
}
//handling general case here
}
Java passes parameters by value, so setting n to null has no effect outside of the method. This means the method essentially does nothing when passed the last node of a list.
You need to set null the reference in the previous node, not the variable that references to your last node, something like this:
if(n.next == null) {
prev.next = null;
return;
}
n is local to the method, so changing its value won't affect the list itself. You need to modify the next of the previous node, which you do not have access to.
I need to write a method that starts with a single linked list of integers and a special value called the splitting value. The elements of the list are in no particular order. The method divides the nodes into two linked lists: one containing all the nodes that contain an element less than the splitting value and one that contains all the other nodes. If the original linked list had any repeated integers (i.e., any two or more nodes with the same element in them), then the new linked list that has this element should have the same number of nodes that repeat this element. The method returns two head references - one for each of the linked lists that were created.
I have been spent countless hours trying to get this right and think this is the closest but I have an error while compiling that my copyTail* IntNodes may not be initialized. I also may be completely wrong with my code....
Any help pointing in me in the right direction??
public static IntNode[ ] listSplitLessGreater(IntNode source, int splitter)
{
IntNode copyHeadLess;
IntNode copyTailLess;
IntNode copyHeadGreater;
IntNode copyTailGreater;
IntNode[ ] answer = new IntNode[2];
boolean less = true;
boolean greater = true;
// Handle the special case of the empty list.
if (source == null)
return answer; // The answer has two null references .
//Split list into two lists less and greater/equal than splitter.
while (source.link != null)
{
if (splitter < source.data)
{
if (less)
{
copyHeadLess = new IntNode(source.data, null);
copyTailLess = copyHeadLess;
less=false;
}
else
{
source = source.link;
copyTailLess.addNodeAfter(source.data);
copyTailLess = copyTailLess.link;
}
}
else
{
if (greater)
{
copyHeadGreater = new IntNode(source.data, null);
copyTailGreater = copyHeadGreater;
greater=false;
}
else
{
source = source.link;
copyTailGreater.addNodeAfter(source.data);
copyTailGreater = copyTailGreater.link;
}
}
}
//Return Head References
answer[0] = copyHeadLess;
answer[1] = copyHeadGreater;
return answer;
}
I think you're making it more complicated than it needs to be, by modelling a list just with a single class (IntNode). If you model it as "the list" and "a node in the list" then it's easy to have an empty list. You also don't need to keep track of both the head and the tail - the list can do that. At that point, it's very simple:
Create two empty lists, one for "lower" and one for "not lower"
Iterate over the original list:
Work out which list to add the element to
Add the element
Return both lists (e.g. using an array as you have done)
Note that even without that, you can make your code simpler by just using null to mean "I haven't got this list yet". At the moment your code won't compile, as copyHeadLess etc aren't definitely assigned when they're used. You know that you won't try to use them until they've been assigned, but the compiler doesn't. I'd still recommend the remodelling approach though :)
If source isn't null, but source.link is null (list is only composed of one element) then you never assign to your copyHeadLess, etc, variables. Try initializing them to null or whatever the default is:
IntNode copyHeadLess = null;
IntNode copyTailLess = null;
IntNode copyHeadGreater = null;
IntNode copyTailGreater = null;
IntNode[ ] answer = new IntNode[2];
boolean less = true;
boolean greater = true;
// Handle the special case of the empty list.
if (source == null)
return answer; // The answer has two null references .
//Split list into two lists less and greater/equal than splitter.
while (source.link != null)
{
// what about case where source isn't null but source.link is null?
}
//Return Head References
answer[0] = copyHeadLess; // this may have never been assigned in your original code
answer[1] = copyHeadGreater; // this may have never been assigned in your original code
return answer;
}