Practice
delete_n_after_m_optimized(head, 1, 1)?Solution
Step 1: Trace skipping M=1 node
Starting at node 1, skip 1 node means stay at node 1 (loop runs zero times).Step 2: Delete N=1 node after current
Delete node after 1, which is node 2. So, link node 1's next to node 3.Final Answer:
Option A -> Option AQuick Check:
Resulting list is 1 -> 3 -> 4 after deletion [OK]
- Off-by-one in skipping nodes
- Deleting wrong nodes after skipping
- Misunderstanding loop ranges
Solution
Step 1: Trace slow and fast pointers
Initial: slow=1, fast=1; Iteration 1: slow=2, fast=3; Iteration 2: fast.next is null, loop ends.Step 2: Return slow's value
Slow points to node with value 3 at loop end.Final Answer:
Option B -> Option BQuick Check:
For even length, returns second middle node (3) [OK]
- Returning first middle node for even length
- Off-by-one errors in loop condition
- Confusing slow and fast pointer positions
left after the first merge step in the recursion unwinding?Solution
Step 1: Trace recursion to the end
Recursion reaches right = None, then unwinds from node 4 back to node 1.Step 2: First merge step during unwinding
At right=4, left=1, tmp=left.next=2; left.next=4; 4.next=2; left=2 after merge.Final Answer:
Option B -> Option BQuick Check:
After first merge, left points to node with value 2 [OK]
- Confusing left pointer update
- Off-by-one in recursion unwind
- Misreading next pointer assignments
Solution
Step 1: Understand cycle impact
If the list has a cycle, naive traversal will loop infinitely, breaking the algorithm.Step 2: Detect and handle cycle
Use Floyd's cycle detection to identify cycle presence and length, then adjust logic to avoid infinite loops.Final Answer:
Option C -> Option CQuick Check:
Cycle detection is prerequisite for safe traversal [OK]
- Assuming list always terminates
- Using stack without cycle check
- Increasing n arbitrarily
Solution
Step 1: Understand reuse implications
If nodes are reused or list is cyclic, modifying it breaks future traversals.Step 2: Restore list after palindrome check
Reversing second half in-place must be undone to preserve original list structure.Final Answer:
Option D -> Option DQuick Check:
Restoring reversed half ensures list integrity for reuse [OK]
- Ignoring list restoration causing side effects
- Switching to stack approach unnecessarily increasing space
- Assuming array conversion is always better
