enow.com Web Search

Search results

  1. Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
  2. Most of the modern compiler converts the tail recursion into iterative program. Thus, there won't be any issue regarding the usage of the function stack. Hence, both will run with same efficiency. Personally, I like the recursive code. It is elegant, easy and maintainable. Binary search is a notoriously difficult algorithm to implement correctly.

  3. 1. its true that recursion is intutive and elegent and it produces code that is clear and concise. its also correct that some methods such as quick sort, DFS etc. are really hard to implement iterativelly. but in practice recursive implementations are almost always going to be slow when compared to iterative counterparts because of all the ...

  4. In case of a binary search recursion does not help you express your intent any better than the iteration does, so an iterative approach is better. I think the best approach for an interview would be to submit a solution that calls lower_bound : it shows the interviewer that you not only know some basic-level syntax and how to code a freshman ...

  5. They are different in terms of usage of space -- recursive binary search will use log(n) space (because of the stack) unless the tail-calls are removed by the compiler and turned into a non-recursive definition. Anyway, your algorithm loses out significantly in performance because slicing is very expensive (O(n)).

  6. That means leaving the current invocation on the stack, and calling a new one. When you're k levels deep, you've got k lots of stack frame, so the space complexity ends up being proportional to the depth you have to search. With your iterative code, you're allocating one variable (O (1) space) plus a single stack frame for the call (O (1) space).

  7. If I do recursive traversal of a binary tree of N nodes, it will occupy N spaces in execution stack. If i use iteration , i will have to use N spaces in an explicit stack. Question is do we say that recursive traversal is also using O(N) space complexity like iterative one is using? I am talking in terms of running traversal code on some ...

  8. What benefit is there to using recursive binary search over...

    softwareengineering.stackexchange.com/questions/273671

    The sequential search was obviously slower than the binary searches due to the complexity difference and the amount of times the code actually has to loop through the code. Iterative binary search and recursive binary search, however, had the same amount of comparisons. For example:

  9. 1. There really will be no difference between recursive search and iterative search as you are anyway traversing the height of the tree examining wither the left node or the right node but never both (and this goes for both iterative and recursive) and thereby you always traverse the height of the tree. answered Mar 26, 2014 at 18:32.

  10. The recursion is very easy to code, hopefully easy to understand, and is less code. Looping may be a bit more complex (depending on how you view complexity) and code. Recursion may be easier to understand and will be less in the amount of code and in executable size. Recursion will use more stack space assuming you have a few items to transverse.

  11. 0. When considering algorithms, we mainly consider time complexity and space complexity. The time complexity of iterative BFS is O (|V|+|E|), where |V| is the number of vertices and |E| is the number of edges in the graph. So does recursive BFS. And the space complexity of iterative BFS is O (|V|). So does recursive BFS.