Reorder Linked List in DSA C# - Time & Space Complexity

Time Complexity: Reorder Linked List

O(n)

Understanding Time Complexity

We want to understand how the time needed to reorder a linked list changes as the list gets bigger.

Specifically, how the steps grow when we rearrange nodes from start and end alternately.

Scenario Under Consideration

Analyze the time complexity of the following code snippet.

public void ReorderList(ListNode head) {
    if (head == null) return;
    ListNode slow = head, fast = head;
    while (fast != null && fast.next != null) {
        slow = slow.next;
        fast = fast.next.next;
    }
    ListNode second = ReverseList(slow.next);
    slow.next = null;
    ListNode first = head;
    while (second != null) {
        ListNode temp1 = first.next;
        ListNode temp2 = second.next;
        first.next = second;
        second.next = temp1;
        first = temp1;
        second = temp2;
    }
}

private ListNode ReverseList(ListNode head) {
    ListNode prev = null;
    while (head != null) {
        ListNode next = head.next;
        head.next = prev;
        prev = head;
        head = next;
    }
    return prev;
}
    

This code reorders a linked list by first finding the middle, reversing the second half, and then merging the two halves alternately.

Identify Repeating Operations

Identify the loops, recursion, array traversals that repeat.

• Primary operation: Traversing the list multiple times: once to find the middle, once to reverse the second half, and once to merge.
• How many times: Each traversal goes through about n/2 or fewer nodes, where n is the list length.

How Execution Grows With Input

As the list size grows, the number of steps grows roughly in a straight line with it.

Input Size (n)	Approx. Operations
10	About 30 steps (3 passes of ~10 nodes)
100	About 300 steps
1000	About 3000 steps

Pattern observation: The operations increase linearly as the list size increases.

Final Time Complexity

Time Complexity: O(n)

This means the time to reorder grows directly in proportion to the list size.

Common Mistake

[X] Wrong: "Reversing the second half or merging will take extra nested loops, making it slower than linear."

[OK] Correct: Each step processes nodes in a single pass without nested loops, so the total work stays proportional to n.

Interview Connect

Understanding this linear time approach shows you can handle linked list manipulations efficiently, a key skill in many coding challenges.

Self-Check

"What if we used recursion to reverse the second half instead of iteration? How would the time complexity change?"

Practice

1. What is the main goal of the Reorder Linked List problem?

easy

A. Reverse the entire linked list

B. Sort the linked list in ascending order

C. Rearrange the list so nodes alternate from start and end

D. Remove duplicate nodes from the list

Solution

1. Step 1: Understand the problem statement

   The problem asks to reorder the linked list so that nodes are arranged by alternating from the start and the end of the list.

2. Step 2: Differentiate from other operations

   This is not sorting or reversing the whole list, but a specific pattern: first node, last node, second node, second last node, and so on.

3. Final Answer:

   Rearrange the list so nodes alternate from start and end -> Option C

4. Quick Check:

   Reorder means alternate start and end nodes [OK]

Hint: Reorder means alternate nodes from front and back [OK]

Common Mistakes:

• Confusing reorder with sorting
• Thinking reorder means full reversal
• Ignoring the alternating pattern

2. Which of the following C# code snippets correctly declares a singly linked list node class used in reorder linked list problems?

easy

A. public class ListNode { public int val; public ListNode next; public ListNode(int x) { val = x; next = null; } }

B. class Node { int val; Node next; Node(int x) { val = x; next = null; } }

C. public struct ListNode { public int val; public ListNode next; }

D. public class ListNode { int val; ListNode next; ListNode(int x) { val = x; next = null; } }

Solution

1. Step 1: Check for public accessibility and constructor

   public class ListNode { public int val; public ListNode next; public ListNode(int x) { val = x; next = null; } } correctly declares a public class with public fields and a constructor initializing value and next pointer.

2. Step 2: Identify missing public keywords and struct misuse

   Options A and D miss public keywords making fields inaccessible; C uses struct which is not typical for linked list nodes.

3. Final Answer:

   public class ListNode { public int val; public ListNode next; public ListNode(int x) { val = x; next = null; } } -> Option A

4. Quick Check:

   Public class with constructor and public fields [OK]

Hint: Use public class with constructor and public fields [OK]

Common Mistakes:

• Omitting public keyword for fields
• Using struct instead of class
• Missing constructor initialization

3. Given the linked list: 1 -> 2 -> 3 -> 4 -> 5 -> null, what will be the list after applying the reorder linked list algorithm?

medium

A. 1 -> 5 -> 2 -> 4 -> 3 -> null

B. 5 -> 4 -> 3 -> 2 -> 1 -> null

C. 1 -> 2 -> 3 -> 4 -> 5 -> null

D. 1 -> 3 -> 5 -> 2 -> 4 -> null

Solution

1. Step 1: Identify the reorder pattern

   The reorder pattern takes first node, last node, second node, second last node, and so on.

2. Step 2: Apply pattern to given list

   Start with 1, then 5, then 2, then 4, then 3 remains in the middle.

3. Final Answer:

   1 -> 5 -> 2 -> 4 -> 3 -> null -> Option A

4. Quick Check:

   Alternate front and back nodes [OK]

Hint: Alternate nodes from front and back [OK]

Common Mistakes:

• Reversing entire list instead of reordering
• Not alternating nodes correctly
• Leaving list unchanged

4. Consider this C# code snippet for reordering a linked list. What is the bug?

public void ReorderList(ListNode head) {
  if (head == null) return;
  ListNode slow = head, fast = head;
  while (fast != null && fast.next != null) {
    slow = slow.next;
    fast = fast.next.next;
  }
  ListNode second = ReverseList(slow);
  ListNode first = head;
  while (second != null) {
    ListNode temp1 = first.next;
    ListNode temp2 = second.next;
    first.next = second;
    second.next = temp1;
    first = temp1;
    second = temp2;
  }
}

medium

A. The ReverseList method is missing

B. The middle node is included in the reversed second half causing cycle

C. The fast pointer initialization is incorrect

D. The loop condition should be while (second.next != null)

Solution

1. Step 1: Analyze slow pointer position after loop

   After the loop, slow points to the middle node, which is included in the reversed second half.

2. Step 2: Understand consequence of including middle node

   Including the middle node causes the merged list to have a cycle or incorrect links because the middle node is connected twice.

3. Final Answer:

   The middle node is included in the reversed second half causing cycle -> Option B

4. Quick Check:

   Exclude middle node before reversing second half [OK]

Hint: Exclude middle node before reversing second half [OK]

Common Mistakes:

• Not splitting list before reversing second half
• Incorrect loop conditions
• Assuming ReverseList is missing error

5. You have a linked list with nodes: 10 -> 20 -> 30 -> 40 -> 50 -> 60 -> null. After applying the reorder linked list algorithm, what is the correct final list?

hard

A. 10 -> 30 -> 50 -> 20 -> 40 -> 60 -> null

B. 60 -> 50 -> 40 -> 30 -> 20 -> 10 -> null

C. 10 -> 20 -> 30 -> 40 -> 50 -> 60 -> null

D. 10 -> 60 -> 20 -> 50 -> 30 -> 40 -> null

Solution

1. Step 1: Identify the reorder pattern for even length list

   For even nodes, reorder alternates first and last nodes: 10, 60, 20, 50, 30, 40.

2. Step 2: Apply the pattern to given list

   Start with 10, then 60, then 20, then 50, then 30, then 40, ending with null.

3. Final Answer:

   10 -> 60 -> 20 -> 50 -> 30 -> 40 -> null -> Option D

4. Quick Check:

   Alternate front and back nodes for even length [OK]

Hint: Alternate nodes from front and back for even length [OK]

Common Mistakes:

• Reversing entire list instead of reordering
• Not handling even length correctly
• Leaving list unchanged