Is it possible to compare two binary trees in less than O(n log n) time?
I wrote a java routine to compare 2 binary trees. I am looking for better algorithms that run in less time.
public class TreeNode {
int val;
TreeNode left;
TreeNode right;
TreeNode(int x) { val = x; }
}
class Solution {
public boolean isSameTree(TreeNode p, TreeNode q) {
if ( p == null && q==null)
return true;
if (p == null || q == null)
return false;
if ( (p.val == q.val) && isSameTree(p.left, q.left) &&
isSameTree(p.right, q.right))
return true;
else
return false;
}
}
My code takes O(n log n) time.
How to approach reducing the time required?
java algorithm time-complexity binary-tree
add a comment |
I wrote a java routine to compare 2 binary trees. I am looking for better algorithms that run in less time.
public class TreeNode {
int val;
TreeNode left;
TreeNode right;
TreeNode(int x) { val = x; }
}
class Solution {
public boolean isSameTree(TreeNode p, TreeNode q) {
if ( p == null && q==null)
return true;
if (p == null || q == null)
return false;
if ( (p.val == q.val) && isSameTree(p.left, q.left) &&
isSameTree(p.right, q.right))
return true;
else
return false;
}
}
My code takes O(n log n) time.
How to approach reducing the time required?
java algorithm time-complexity binary-tree
1
If you happen to have asize
variable at the base of the structure, compare that first.
– Boann
4 hours ago
2
Don't write, never present uncommented code. Never codeif (condition) return true; else return false;
. Just// same tree if same root, left, and right return p == q || null != p && null != q && p.val == q.val && isSameTree(p.left, q.left) && isSameTree(p.right, q.right);
– greybeard
1 hour ago
What do you count asn
? Your algorithm looks very much linear on the number of nodes.
– Bergi
1 min ago
add a comment |
I wrote a java routine to compare 2 binary trees. I am looking for better algorithms that run in less time.
public class TreeNode {
int val;
TreeNode left;
TreeNode right;
TreeNode(int x) { val = x; }
}
class Solution {
public boolean isSameTree(TreeNode p, TreeNode q) {
if ( p == null && q==null)
return true;
if (p == null || q == null)
return false;
if ( (p.val == q.val) && isSameTree(p.left, q.left) &&
isSameTree(p.right, q.right))
return true;
else
return false;
}
}
My code takes O(n log n) time.
How to approach reducing the time required?
java algorithm time-complexity binary-tree
I wrote a java routine to compare 2 binary trees. I am looking for better algorithms that run in less time.
public class TreeNode {
int val;
TreeNode left;
TreeNode right;
TreeNode(int x) { val = x; }
}
class Solution {
public boolean isSameTree(TreeNode p, TreeNode q) {
if ( p == null && q==null)
return true;
if (p == null || q == null)
return false;
if ( (p.val == q.val) && isSameTree(p.left, q.left) &&
isSameTree(p.right, q.right))
return true;
else
return false;
}
}
My code takes O(n log n) time.
How to approach reducing the time required?
java algorithm time-complexity binary-tree
java algorithm time-complexity binary-tree
edited 6 hours ago
nullpointer
43.8k1093180
43.8k1093180
asked 7 hours ago
Louise
461
461
1
If you happen to have asize
variable at the base of the structure, compare that first.
– Boann
4 hours ago
2
Don't write, never present uncommented code. Never codeif (condition) return true; else return false;
. Just// same tree if same root, left, and right return p == q || null != p && null != q && p.val == q.val && isSameTree(p.left, q.left) && isSameTree(p.right, q.right);
– greybeard
1 hour ago
What do you count asn
? Your algorithm looks very much linear on the number of nodes.
– Bergi
1 min ago
add a comment |
1
If you happen to have asize
variable at the base of the structure, compare that first.
– Boann
4 hours ago
2
Don't write, never present uncommented code. Never codeif (condition) return true; else return false;
. Just// same tree if same root, left, and right return p == q || null != p && null != q && p.val == q.val && isSameTree(p.left, q.left) && isSameTree(p.right, q.right);
– greybeard
1 hour ago
What do you count asn
? Your algorithm looks very much linear on the number of nodes.
– Bergi
1 min ago
1
1
If you happen to have a
size
variable at the base of the structure, compare that first.– Boann
4 hours ago
If you happen to have a
size
variable at the base of the structure, compare that first.– Boann
4 hours ago
2
2
Don't write, never present uncommented code. Never code
if (condition) return true; else return false;
. Just // same tree if same root, left, and right return p == q || null != p && null != q && p.val == q.val && isSameTree(p.left, q.left) && isSameTree(p.right, q.right);
– greybeard
1 hour ago
Don't write, never present uncommented code. Never code
if (condition) return true; else return false;
. Just // same tree if same root, left, and right return p == q || null != p && null != q && p.val == q.val && isSameTree(p.left, q.left) && isSameTree(p.right, q.right);
– greybeard
1 hour ago
What do you count as
n
? Your algorithm looks very much linear on the number of nodes.– Bergi
1 min ago
What do you count as
n
? Your algorithm looks very much linear on the number of nodes.– Bergi
1 min ago
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
The current runtime of your approach is actually O(n)
, where n
should be the number of nodes of the tree with lesser(or if they're equal) nodes.
Also, note to compare all the values of a data structure you would have to visit all of them and that is the runtime you could achieve and not reduce further. In the current case, at the worst, you would have to visit all the nodes of the smaller tree and hence O(n)
.
Hence any other approach though might help you with conditional optimization, your current solution has an optimal runtime which cannot be reduced further.
6
In fact ... it is O(n) worst case. The best case is O(1).
– Stephen C
6 hours ago
add a comment |
Time complexity of above solution is O(n + m) where m and n are number of nodes in two trees.
import java.util.*;
class GfG {
// A Binary Tree Node
static class Node
{
int data;
Node left, right;
}
// Iterative method to find height of Bianry Tree
static boolean areIdentical(Node root1, Node root2)
{
// Return true if both trees are empty
if (root1 != null && root2 != null) return true;
// Return false if one is empty and other is not
if (root1 != null || root2 != null) return false;
// Create an empty queues for simultaneous traversals
Queue<Node > q1 = new LinkedList<Node> ();
Queue<Node> q2 = new LinkedList<Node> ();
// Enqueue Roots of trees in respective queues
q1.add(root1);
q2.add(root2);
while (!q1.isEmpty() && !q2.isEmpty())
{
// Get front nodes and compare them
Node n1 = q1.peek();
Node n2 = q2.peek();
if (n1.data != n2.data)
return false;
// Remove front nodes from queues
q1.remove();
q2.remove();
/* Enqueue left children of both nodes */
if (n1.left != null && n2.left != null)
{
q1.add(n1.left);
q2.add(n2.left);
}
// If one left child is empty and other is not
else if (n1.left != null || n2.left != null)
return false;
// Right child code (Similar to left child code)
if (n1.right != null && n2.right != null)
{
q1.add(n1.right);
q2.add(n2.right);
}
else if (n1.right != null || n2.right != null)
return false;
}
return true;
}
// Utility function to create a new tree node
static Node newNode(int data)
{
Node temp = new Node();
temp.data = data;
temp.left = null;
temp.right = null;
return temp;
}
// Driver program to test above functions
public static void main(String args)
{
Node root1 = newNode(1);
root1.left = newNode(2);
root1.right = newNode(3);
root1.left.left = newNode(4);
root1.left.right = newNode(5);
Node root2 = newNode(1);
root2.left = newNode(2);
root2.right = newNode(3);
root2.left.left = newNode(4);
root2.left.right = newNode(5);
if(areIdentical(root1, root2) == true)
System.out.println("Yes");
else
System.out.println("No");
}
}
This is literally the exact same algorithm as the one in the OP.
– Andrew Sun
1 hour ago
@AndrewSun Try to compare, it is not the same algo, compare first then try to down-vote.
– Common Man
1 hour ago
What is different about it then?
– Andrew Sun
1 hour ago
1. If both trees are empty then return 1. 2. Else If both trees are non -empty (a) Check data of the root nodes (tree1->data == tree2->data) (b) Check left subtrees recursively i.e., call sameTree( tree1->left_subtree, tree2->left_subtree) (c) Check right subtrees recursively i.e., call sameTree( tree1->right_subtree, tree2->right_subtree) (d) If a,b and c are true then return 1. 3 Else return 0 (one is empty and other is not)
– Common Man
1 hour ago
see the comment by greybeard in above, huh, idk why you downvoted knowing that complexity of mine is 0(m) whhile OP is O(nlogn)
– Common Man
1 hour ago
|
show 5 more comments
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function () {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function () {
StackExchange.snippets.init();
});
});
}, "code-snippets");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "1"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f54067216%2fis-it-possible-to-compare-two-binary-trees-in-less-than-on-log-n-time%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
The current runtime of your approach is actually O(n)
, where n
should be the number of nodes of the tree with lesser(or if they're equal) nodes.
Also, note to compare all the values of a data structure you would have to visit all of them and that is the runtime you could achieve and not reduce further. In the current case, at the worst, you would have to visit all the nodes of the smaller tree and hence O(n)
.
Hence any other approach though might help you with conditional optimization, your current solution has an optimal runtime which cannot be reduced further.
6
In fact ... it is O(n) worst case. The best case is O(1).
– Stephen C
6 hours ago
add a comment |
The current runtime of your approach is actually O(n)
, where n
should be the number of nodes of the tree with lesser(or if they're equal) nodes.
Also, note to compare all the values of a data structure you would have to visit all of them and that is the runtime you could achieve and not reduce further. In the current case, at the worst, you would have to visit all the nodes of the smaller tree and hence O(n)
.
Hence any other approach though might help you with conditional optimization, your current solution has an optimal runtime which cannot be reduced further.
6
In fact ... it is O(n) worst case. The best case is O(1).
– Stephen C
6 hours ago
add a comment |
The current runtime of your approach is actually O(n)
, where n
should be the number of nodes of the tree with lesser(or if they're equal) nodes.
Also, note to compare all the values of a data structure you would have to visit all of them and that is the runtime you could achieve and not reduce further. In the current case, at the worst, you would have to visit all the nodes of the smaller tree and hence O(n)
.
Hence any other approach though might help you with conditional optimization, your current solution has an optimal runtime which cannot be reduced further.
The current runtime of your approach is actually O(n)
, where n
should be the number of nodes of the tree with lesser(or if they're equal) nodes.
Also, note to compare all the values of a data structure you would have to visit all of them and that is the runtime you could achieve and not reduce further. In the current case, at the worst, you would have to visit all the nodes of the smaller tree and hence O(n)
.
Hence any other approach though might help you with conditional optimization, your current solution has an optimal runtime which cannot be reduced further.
edited 5 hours ago
ruakh
124k13197251
124k13197251
answered 6 hours ago
nullpointer
43.8k1093180
43.8k1093180
6
In fact ... it is O(n) worst case. The best case is O(1).
– Stephen C
6 hours ago
add a comment |
6
In fact ... it is O(n) worst case. The best case is O(1).
– Stephen C
6 hours ago
6
6
In fact ... it is O(n) worst case. The best case is O(1).
– Stephen C
6 hours ago
In fact ... it is O(n) worst case. The best case is O(1).
– Stephen C
6 hours ago
add a comment |
Time complexity of above solution is O(n + m) where m and n are number of nodes in two trees.
import java.util.*;
class GfG {
// A Binary Tree Node
static class Node
{
int data;
Node left, right;
}
// Iterative method to find height of Bianry Tree
static boolean areIdentical(Node root1, Node root2)
{
// Return true if both trees are empty
if (root1 != null && root2 != null) return true;
// Return false if one is empty and other is not
if (root1 != null || root2 != null) return false;
// Create an empty queues for simultaneous traversals
Queue<Node > q1 = new LinkedList<Node> ();
Queue<Node> q2 = new LinkedList<Node> ();
// Enqueue Roots of trees in respective queues
q1.add(root1);
q2.add(root2);
while (!q1.isEmpty() && !q2.isEmpty())
{
// Get front nodes and compare them
Node n1 = q1.peek();
Node n2 = q2.peek();
if (n1.data != n2.data)
return false;
// Remove front nodes from queues
q1.remove();
q2.remove();
/* Enqueue left children of both nodes */
if (n1.left != null && n2.left != null)
{
q1.add(n1.left);
q2.add(n2.left);
}
// If one left child is empty and other is not
else if (n1.left != null || n2.left != null)
return false;
// Right child code (Similar to left child code)
if (n1.right != null && n2.right != null)
{
q1.add(n1.right);
q2.add(n2.right);
}
else if (n1.right != null || n2.right != null)
return false;
}
return true;
}
// Utility function to create a new tree node
static Node newNode(int data)
{
Node temp = new Node();
temp.data = data;
temp.left = null;
temp.right = null;
return temp;
}
// Driver program to test above functions
public static void main(String args)
{
Node root1 = newNode(1);
root1.left = newNode(2);
root1.right = newNode(3);
root1.left.left = newNode(4);
root1.left.right = newNode(5);
Node root2 = newNode(1);
root2.left = newNode(2);
root2.right = newNode(3);
root2.left.left = newNode(4);
root2.left.right = newNode(5);
if(areIdentical(root1, root2) == true)
System.out.println("Yes");
else
System.out.println("No");
}
}
This is literally the exact same algorithm as the one in the OP.
– Andrew Sun
1 hour ago
@AndrewSun Try to compare, it is not the same algo, compare first then try to down-vote.
– Common Man
1 hour ago
What is different about it then?
– Andrew Sun
1 hour ago
1. If both trees are empty then return 1. 2. Else If both trees are non -empty (a) Check data of the root nodes (tree1->data == tree2->data) (b) Check left subtrees recursively i.e., call sameTree( tree1->left_subtree, tree2->left_subtree) (c) Check right subtrees recursively i.e., call sameTree( tree1->right_subtree, tree2->right_subtree) (d) If a,b and c are true then return 1. 3 Else return 0 (one is empty and other is not)
– Common Man
1 hour ago
see the comment by greybeard in above, huh, idk why you downvoted knowing that complexity of mine is 0(m) whhile OP is O(nlogn)
– Common Man
1 hour ago
|
show 5 more comments
Time complexity of above solution is O(n + m) where m and n are number of nodes in two trees.
import java.util.*;
class GfG {
// A Binary Tree Node
static class Node
{
int data;
Node left, right;
}
// Iterative method to find height of Bianry Tree
static boolean areIdentical(Node root1, Node root2)
{
// Return true if both trees are empty
if (root1 != null && root2 != null) return true;
// Return false if one is empty and other is not
if (root1 != null || root2 != null) return false;
// Create an empty queues for simultaneous traversals
Queue<Node > q1 = new LinkedList<Node> ();
Queue<Node> q2 = new LinkedList<Node> ();
// Enqueue Roots of trees in respective queues
q1.add(root1);
q2.add(root2);
while (!q1.isEmpty() && !q2.isEmpty())
{
// Get front nodes and compare them
Node n1 = q1.peek();
Node n2 = q2.peek();
if (n1.data != n2.data)
return false;
// Remove front nodes from queues
q1.remove();
q2.remove();
/* Enqueue left children of both nodes */
if (n1.left != null && n2.left != null)
{
q1.add(n1.left);
q2.add(n2.left);
}
// If one left child is empty and other is not
else if (n1.left != null || n2.left != null)
return false;
// Right child code (Similar to left child code)
if (n1.right != null && n2.right != null)
{
q1.add(n1.right);
q2.add(n2.right);
}
else if (n1.right != null || n2.right != null)
return false;
}
return true;
}
// Utility function to create a new tree node
static Node newNode(int data)
{
Node temp = new Node();
temp.data = data;
temp.left = null;
temp.right = null;
return temp;
}
// Driver program to test above functions
public static void main(String args)
{
Node root1 = newNode(1);
root1.left = newNode(2);
root1.right = newNode(3);
root1.left.left = newNode(4);
root1.left.right = newNode(5);
Node root2 = newNode(1);
root2.left = newNode(2);
root2.right = newNode(3);
root2.left.left = newNode(4);
root2.left.right = newNode(5);
if(areIdentical(root1, root2) == true)
System.out.println("Yes");
else
System.out.println("No");
}
}
This is literally the exact same algorithm as the one in the OP.
– Andrew Sun
1 hour ago
@AndrewSun Try to compare, it is not the same algo, compare first then try to down-vote.
– Common Man
1 hour ago
What is different about it then?
– Andrew Sun
1 hour ago
1. If both trees are empty then return 1. 2. Else If both trees are non -empty (a) Check data of the root nodes (tree1->data == tree2->data) (b) Check left subtrees recursively i.e., call sameTree( tree1->left_subtree, tree2->left_subtree) (c) Check right subtrees recursively i.e., call sameTree( tree1->right_subtree, tree2->right_subtree) (d) If a,b and c are true then return 1. 3 Else return 0 (one is empty and other is not)
– Common Man
1 hour ago
see the comment by greybeard in above, huh, idk why you downvoted knowing that complexity of mine is 0(m) whhile OP is O(nlogn)
– Common Man
1 hour ago
|
show 5 more comments
Time complexity of above solution is O(n + m) where m and n are number of nodes in two trees.
import java.util.*;
class GfG {
// A Binary Tree Node
static class Node
{
int data;
Node left, right;
}
// Iterative method to find height of Bianry Tree
static boolean areIdentical(Node root1, Node root2)
{
// Return true if both trees are empty
if (root1 != null && root2 != null) return true;
// Return false if one is empty and other is not
if (root1 != null || root2 != null) return false;
// Create an empty queues for simultaneous traversals
Queue<Node > q1 = new LinkedList<Node> ();
Queue<Node> q2 = new LinkedList<Node> ();
// Enqueue Roots of trees in respective queues
q1.add(root1);
q2.add(root2);
while (!q1.isEmpty() && !q2.isEmpty())
{
// Get front nodes and compare them
Node n1 = q1.peek();
Node n2 = q2.peek();
if (n1.data != n2.data)
return false;
// Remove front nodes from queues
q1.remove();
q2.remove();
/* Enqueue left children of both nodes */
if (n1.left != null && n2.left != null)
{
q1.add(n1.left);
q2.add(n2.left);
}
// If one left child is empty and other is not
else if (n1.left != null || n2.left != null)
return false;
// Right child code (Similar to left child code)
if (n1.right != null && n2.right != null)
{
q1.add(n1.right);
q2.add(n2.right);
}
else if (n1.right != null || n2.right != null)
return false;
}
return true;
}
// Utility function to create a new tree node
static Node newNode(int data)
{
Node temp = new Node();
temp.data = data;
temp.left = null;
temp.right = null;
return temp;
}
// Driver program to test above functions
public static void main(String args)
{
Node root1 = newNode(1);
root1.left = newNode(2);
root1.right = newNode(3);
root1.left.left = newNode(4);
root1.left.right = newNode(5);
Node root2 = newNode(1);
root2.left = newNode(2);
root2.right = newNode(3);
root2.left.left = newNode(4);
root2.left.right = newNode(5);
if(areIdentical(root1, root2) == true)
System.out.println("Yes");
else
System.out.println("No");
}
}
Time complexity of above solution is O(n + m) where m and n are number of nodes in two trees.
import java.util.*;
class GfG {
// A Binary Tree Node
static class Node
{
int data;
Node left, right;
}
// Iterative method to find height of Bianry Tree
static boolean areIdentical(Node root1, Node root2)
{
// Return true if both trees are empty
if (root1 != null && root2 != null) return true;
// Return false if one is empty and other is not
if (root1 != null || root2 != null) return false;
// Create an empty queues for simultaneous traversals
Queue<Node > q1 = new LinkedList<Node> ();
Queue<Node> q2 = new LinkedList<Node> ();
// Enqueue Roots of trees in respective queues
q1.add(root1);
q2.add(root2);
while (!q1.isEmpty() && !q2.isEmpty())
{
// Get front nodes and compare them
Node n1 = q1.peek();
Node n2 = q2.peek();
if (n1.data != n2.data)
return false;
// Remove front nodes from queues
q1.remove();
q2.remove();
/* Enqueue left children of both nodes */
if (n1.left != null && n2.left != null)
{
q1.add(n1.left);
q2.add(n2.left);
}
// If one left child is empty and other is not
else if (n1.left != null || n2.left != null)
return false;
// Right child code (Similar to left child code)
if (n1.right != null && n2.right != null)
{
q1.add(n1.right);
q2.add(n2.right);
}
else if (n1.right != null || n2.right != null)
return false;
}
return true;
}
// Utility function to create a new tree node
static Node newNode(int data)
{
Node temp = new Node();
temp.data = data;
temp.left = null;
temp.right = null;
return temp;
}
// Driver program to test above functions
public static void main(String args)
{
Node root1 = newNode(1);
root1.left = newNode(2);
root1.right = newNode(3);
root1.left.left = newNode(4);
root1.left.right = newNode(5);
Node root2 = newNode(1);
root2.left = newNode(2);
root2.right = newNode(3);
root2.left.left = newNode(4);
root2.left.right = newNode(5);
if(areIdentical(root1, root2) == true)
System.out.println("Yes");
else
System.out.println("No");
}
}
edited 51 mins ago
answered 1 hour ago
Common Man
6792921
6792921
This is literally the exact same algorithm as the one in the OP.
– Andrew Sun
1 hour ago
@AndrewSun Try to compare, it is not the same algo, compare first then try to down-vote.
– Common Man
1 hour ago
What is different about it then?
– Andrew Sun
1 hour ago
1. If both trees are empty then return 1. 2. Else If both trees are non -empty (a) Check data of the root nodes (tree1->data == tree2->data) (b) Check left subtrees recursively i.e., call sameTree( tree1->left_subtree, tree2->left_subtree) (c) Check right subtrees recursively i.e., call sameTree( tree1->right_subtree, tree2->right_subtree) (d) If a,b and c are true then return 1. 3 Else return 0 (one is empty and other is not)
– Common Man
1 hour ago
see the comment by greybeard in above, huh, idk why you downvoted knowing that complexity of mine is 0(m) whhile OP is O(nlogn)
– Common Man
1 hour ago
|
show 5 more comments
This is literally the exact same algorithm as the one in the OP.
– Andrew Sun
1 hour ago
@AndrewSun Try to compare, it is not the same algo, compare first then try to down-vote.
– Common Man
1 hour ago
What is different about it then?
– Andrew Sun
1 hour ago
1. If both trees are empty then return 1. 2. Else If both trees are non -empty (a) Check data of the root nodes (tree1->data == tree2->data) (b) Check left subtrees recursively i.e., call sameTree( tree1->left_subtree, tree2->left_subtree) (c) Check right subtrees recursively i.e., call sameTree( tree1->right_subtree, tree2->right_subtree) (d) If a,b and c are true then return 1. 3 Else return 0 (one is empty and other is not)
– Common Man
1 hour ago
see the comment by greybeard in above, huh, idk why you downvoted knowing that complexity of mine is 0(m) whhile OP is O(nlogn)
– Common Man
1 hour ago
This is literally the exact same algorithm as the one in the OP.
– Andrew Sun
1 hour ago
This is literally the exact same algorithm as the one in the OP.
– Andrew Sun
1 hour ago
@AndrewSun Try to compare, it is not the same algo, compare first then try to down-vote.
– Common Man
1 hour ago
@AndrewSun Try to compare, it is not the same algo, compare first then try to down-vote.
– Common Man
1 hour ago
What is different about it then?
– Andrew Sun
1 hour ago
What is different about it then?
– Andrew Sun
1 hour ago
1. If both trees are empty then return 1. 2. Else If both trees are non -empty (a) Check data of the root nodes (tree1->data == tree2->data) (b) Check left subtrees recursively i.e., call sameTree( tree1->left_subtree, tree2->left_subtree) (c) Check right subtrees recursively i.e., call sameTree( tree1->right_subtree, tree2->right_subtree) (d) If a,b and c are true then return 1. 3 Else return 0 (one is empty and other is not)
– Common Man
1 hour ago
1. If both trees are empty then return 1. 2. Else If both trees are non -empty (a) Check data of the root nodes (tree1->data == tree2->data) (b) Check left subtrees recursively i.e., call sameTree( tree1->left_subtree, tree2->left_subtree) (c) Check right subtrees recursively i.e., call sameTree( tree1->right_subtree, tree2->right_subtree) (d) If a,b and c are true then return 1. 3 Else return 0 (one is empty and other is not)
– Common Man
1 hour ago
see the comment by greybeard in above, huh, idk why you downvoted knowing that complexity of mine is 0(m) whhile OP is O(nlogn)
– Common Man
1 hour ago
see the comment by greybeard in above, huh, idk why you downvoted knowing that complexity of mine is 0(m) whhile OP is O(nlogn)
– Common Man
1 hour ago
|
show 5 more comments
Thanks for contributing an answer to Stack Overflow!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.
Please pay close attention to the following guidance:
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f54067216%2fis-it-possible-to-compare-two-binary-trees-in-less-than-on-log-n-time%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
1
If you happen to have a
size
variable at the base of the structure, compare that first.– Boann
4 hours ago
2
Don't write, never present uncommented code. Never code
if (condition) return true; else return false;
. Just// same tree if same root, left, and right return p == q || null != p && null != q && p.val == q.val && isSameTree(p.left, q.left) && isSameTree(p.right, q.right);
– greybeard
1 hour ago
What do you count as
n
? Your algorithm looks very much linear on the number of nodes.– Bergi
1 min ago