Is it possible to compare two binary trees in less than O(n log n) time?












9














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?










share|improve this question




















  • 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
















9














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?










share|improve this question




















  • 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














9












9








9


1





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?










share|improve this question















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






share|improve this question















share|improve this question













share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited 6 hours ago









nullpointer

43.8k1093180




43.8k1093180










asked 7 hours ago









Louise

461




461








  • 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














  • 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








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












2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes


















11














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.






share|improve this answer



















  • 6




    In fact ... it is O(n) worst case. The best case is O(1).
    – Stephen C
    6 hours ago



















-1














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");
}
}





share|improve this answer























  • 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











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
});


}
});














draft saved

draft discarded


















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









11














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.






share|improve this answer



















  • 6




    In fact ... it is O(n) worst case. The best case is O(1).
    – Stephen C
    6 hours ago
















11














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.






share|improve this answer



















  • 6




    In fact ... it is O(n) worst case. The best case is O(1).
    – Stephen C
    6 hours ago














11












11








11






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.






share|improve this answer














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.







share|improve this answer














share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer








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














  • 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













-1














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");
}
}





share|improve this answer























  • 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
















-1














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");
}
}





share|improve this answer























  • 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














-1












-1








-1






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");
}
}





share|improve this answer














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");
}
}






share|improve this answer














share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer








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


















  • 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


















draft saved

draft discarded




















































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.




draft saved


draft discarded














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





















































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







Popular posts from this blog

Михайлов, Христо

Гороховецкий артиллерийский полигон

Центральная группа войск