What if you could remove any item from a chain without breaking it or losing your place?
Why Delete Node at Specific Position in DSA Python?
Imagine you have a long paper chain made of connected rings, and you want to remove the ring at a certain spot without breaking the whole chain.
Trying to find and remove that ring by counting each one manually is slow and easy to mess up. You might accidentally break the wrong ring or lose track of your place.
Using a method to directly reach and remove the ring at the exact position keeps the chain intact and makes the process quick and safe.
current = head count = 0 while current: if count == pos - 1 and current.next: current.next = current.next.next break current = current.next count += 1
def delete_node(head, pos): if pos == 0: return head.next current = head for _ in range(pos - 1): if current is None or current.next is None: return head current = current.next if current.next: current.next = current.next.next return head
This lets you quickly and safely remove any item from a connected list without breaking the chain.
Removing a specific song from a playlist without stopping the whole music queue.
Manual removal is slow and error-prone.
Deleting at a position keeps the list connected and safe.
It makes managing linked data easy and efficient.
Practice
Solution
Step 1: Understand position 0 in linked list
Position 0 refers to the head node of the list.Step 2: Effect of deleting head node
Deleting the head means the next node becomes the new head.Final Answer:
The head node is removed and the next node becomes the new head -> Option CQuick Check:
Deleting position 0 removes head [OK]
- Thinking last node is deleted at position 0
- Assuming list stays same after deletion
- Deleting all nodes instead of one
pos in a singly linked list in Python?Solution
Step 1: Check deletion at position 0
Deleting at position 0 means moving head to next node.Step 2: Verify syntax correctness
if pos == 0: head = head.next correctly assigns head to head.next when pos is 0.Final Answer:
if pos == 0: head = head.next -> Option BQuick Check:
Correct syntax for deleting head node [OK]
- Using head.prev which doesn't exist in singly linked list
- Wrong condition for position check
- Assigning head incorrectly
class Node:
def __init__(self, data):
self.data = data
self.next = None
def delete_node(head, pos):
if pos == 0:
return head.next
current = head
for _ in range(pos - 1):
current = current.next
current.next = current.next.next
return head
head = Node(10)
head.next = Node(20)
head.next.next = Node(30)
head.next.next.next = Node(40)
head = delete_node(head, 2)
# Print list
current = head
result = []
while current:
result.append(current.data)
current = current.next
print(result)Solution
Step 1: Identify node at position 2
Position 2 node has value 30 in the list 10 -> 20 -> 30 -> 40.Step 2: Delete node at position 2
Node 20's next pointer is updated to node 40, skipping node 30.Final Answer:
[10, 20, 40] -> Option AQuick Check:
Deleted node 30 at position 2 [OK]
- Deleting wrong node due to off-by-one error
- Not updating next pointer correctly
- Returning wrong head
pos in a singly linked list:
def delete_node(head, pos):
if pos == 0:
head = head.next
current = head
for _ in range(pos - 1):
current = current.next
current.next = current.next.next
return headSolution
Step 1: Check deletion at position 0
When pos is 0, head is updated but not returned immediately.Step 2: Effect of missing return
Code continues and tries to access current.next causing errors or wrong behavior.Final Answer:
Missing return after deleting head node -> Option DQuick Check:
Return immediately after deleting head [OK]
- Not returning head after deleting first node
- Ignoring edge cases when list is empty
- Assuming current.next always exists
Solution
Step 1: Delete node at position 0
Deleting head (5), list becomes 10 -> 15 -> 20 -> 25.Step 2: Delete node at position 2
Node at position 2 is 20, deleting it results in 10 -> 15 -> 25.Step 3: Delete node at position 1
Node at position 1 is 15, deleting it results in 10 -> 25.Final Answer:
[10, 25] -> Option AQuick Check:
Sequential deletions update list correctly [OK]
- Not updating list after each deletion
- Confusing positions after deletions
- Deleting wrong nodes due to static indexing
Ready to prove it?
Pass the test and this pattern moves unknown
