Closed. This question is off-topic. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it's on-topic for Stack Overflow.
Closed 10 years ago.
Improve this question
I'm TAing for an introductory course in Java for freshmen. So, far we've learnt most of Java except the OOPS part. Like we can do methods, loops, control stuctures, arrays, strings, recursion etc..
Since this is their first programming course, they are not aware of fancy datastructures yet.
I have dont most of the regular programs like factorial, fibonacci, primes etc..
I'm looking for some interesting problems in the space without using complex datastructures. Any ideas would be super helpful.
thanks, Vinbot
Project Euler has some problems that you can solve without additional data structures, and all the problems have the nice property of being mathematically interesting. Not all the problems will work for your course, but I bet you can find enough that do, especially among the first few.
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 3 years ago.
Improve this question
From what I know about stacks, it seems like this method goes against the whole point of a stack- if you need to know where in your stack a specific element is then why are you using a stack at all?
Edit: I'm not trying to waste anyone's time or ask dumb questions, I'm a student who's honestly just trying to figure out the rationale behind this function so that I can become a better programmer
I would put it like that:
Java has its inconsistencies and this is one of them.
If you take a deeper look you will find that Stack is a subclass of Vector and inherits its mehtods which also seem to make not that much of a sense.
Programming languages are living and growing things made by people and I think you can always find things that don't make sense or things that you wish would have been made in a better way (whatever 'better' means).
In some you will find more in some you will find less flaws.
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 8 years ago.
Improve this question
I had been reading two books on JAVA and while covering data structures, I started to do some online research with regards to "QUEUE" implementation. I have an extensive background in FLEX, however ACTIONSCRIPT isn't comparable to advance languages.
Lets say if I was on a job interview and asked to implement a Queue of Object, how should I pursue it as? I am not looking for code help here, I would like to what would you quick answer be? I have been to Java online docs and do understand there are 13 known implementing classes, and "LinkedList" is one of them.
Google search has return more results with "LinkedList" implementation code than any other.
My apologies if you find this question to be rubbish or pointless in anyway.
Oracle's Java online doc ref:
Do you know what the concept of a queue is and how it differs from a stack (closely related data structure)? If so, you should be able to think of multiple ways to implement it.
Which is best depends on the exact requirements of the task it's being used to address.
So the right response to that interview question is not to start coding but to ask them for more information about the requirements your implementation has to address. Performance? Memory size? Multitasking? Any limits on maximum queue depth, eg to guard against things like a DOS attack? What's being enqueued -- objects, primitives, other? Specific kinds thereof? Parameterized type? Are there any values which should be discarded (maybe null shouldn't be enqueued)?
Knowing the requirements, you should be able to judge which answer is appropriate. Starting coding without asking the requirements is immediately going to earn you a demerit.
Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 9 years ago.
Improve this question
(This might be the wrong place to ask the question, please let me know).
Should I name my method isStaticallyImported or isStaticlyImported?
(They'd be pronounced pretty much the same way, I believe)
Of course they should be in good english. Even if the human brain will likely have no problems reading garbled up words, compilers do not enjoy the same luxury.
How many times have you miswritten a variable name, then later on used the correct spelling, only to find out that the program crashed at run/compile time?
This problem is only amplified when working on code that was not written by you, because we think of things as, well, things, and having to specially remember that the thing had to be spelled in a special way is just an unneeded break to your workflow.
Yes, your variables should be clear to the developer. You can name it whatever you want and it will work because the compiler doesn't care. When you name the variable in a human readable manner then developers after you will be able to read and understand your code much easier. You should name it "isStaticallyImported".
They should be in the most easily understandable language for those using and maintaining it in my opinion.
I'm also pretty sure the compiler doesn't care about the quality of spelling.
Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 9 years ago.
Improve this question
This is kind of unusual question for developers but for some reason i want to post it here and hope to get adequate answer.
Here is a simple example:
I wrote a java function that calculates distance between two geo points. The function is not more than 50 lines of code. I decided to download a source code from ibm that does the same thing but when i opened it i saw that it looks very complicated and is almost thousand lines of code.
What kind of people write such source code? Are they just very good programmers? Should i use their source code or my own?
I have noticed this kind of thing lots of times and i from time to time i start to wonder if it is just me who do not know how exactly to program or maybe i am wrong?
Do you guys have the same kind of feeling when you browse throught some other peoples source code?
The code you found, does it do the exact same calculation? Perhaps it takes into account some edge cases you didn't think of, or uses an algorithm that has better numerical stability, lower asymptotic complexity, or is written to take advantage of branch prediction or CPU caches. Or it could be just over-engineered.
Remember the saying: "For every complex problem there is a solution that is simple, elegant, and wrong." If you are dealing with numerical software, even the most basic problems like adding a bunch of numbers can turn out to be surprisingly complex.
Closed. This question is off-topic. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it's on-topic for Stack Overflow.
Closed 9 years ago.
Improve this question
Lambda expressions are being added in Java 8. I want to understand why this is important. What does it mean to a Java programmer who is yet to be exposed to functional programming idioms? Does it mean I can write code that performs better or scales massively or does it only make the code less verbose. Or all of it.
Oracle already has tutorial up on the topic. It lists several great uses cases.
Before I found the link, I was going to say that lambda expressions let you pass "functions" to code. So you can write code more easily that we used to need a whole mess of interfaces/abstract classes for. For example, suppose you have code that has some complex loop/conditional logic or workflow. At one step you want to do something different. With lambda expressions, you can just pass in that "something different." Read the tutorial though. It's very clear.