Completed pr 2

[addi091]

No description provided.

[super30admin]

The student has submitted solutions for several exercises (BinarySearch, QuickSort, LinkedList, MergeSort, IterativeQuickSort). Here's a detailed evaluation:

1. BinarySearch:

   • Correctness: The implementation correctly follows the binary search algorithm.
   • Time Complexity: Correctly identified as O(log n).
   • Space Complexity: Correctly identified as O(1).
   • Code Quality: Well-structured and readable. Good use of comments.
   • Suggestion: Could add input validation (e.g., checking if array is sorted).

2. QuickSort:

   • Correctness: Implementation appears correct with proper partitioning.
   • Time Complexity: Missing in comments (should be O(n log n) average case).
   • Space Complexity: Missing in comments (should be O(log n) due to recursion stack).
   • Code Quality: Good structure, but comments about complexity should be completed.
   • Suggestion: Mention worst-case scenario (O(n^2)) in comments.

3. LinkedList (Middle Element):

   • Correctness: Correctly implements fast/slow pointer approach.
   • Time Complexity: Correctly identified as O(n).
   • Space Complexity: Correctly identified as O(1).
   • Code Quality: Well-structured and readable.
   • Suggestion: Could handle edge case where head is null.

4. MergeSort:

   • Correctness: Implementation appears correct.
   • Time Complexity: Correctly identified as O(n log n).
   • Space Complexity: Correctly identified as O(n).
   • Code Quality: Good structure and comments.
   • Suggestion: Could mention that this is a stable sort in comments.

5. IterativeQuickSort:

   • Correctness: Implementation appears correct using stack.
   • Time Complexity: Correctly identified as O(n log n).
   • Space Complexity: Correctly identified as O(n).
   • Code Quality: Good structure but swap method is empty (should be implemented).
   • Suggestion: Implement the swap method and mention worst-case scenario.

General Observations:

• The student has shown good understanding of algorithms and data structures.
• Comments about time/space complexity are mostly correct but sometimes missing.
• Code is generally well-structured and readable.
• Some edge cases could be better handled (null checks, input validation).
• The swap method in IterativeQuickSort needs implementation.