Anonymous user
Talk:Closest-pair problem: Difference between revisions
→Comment on Algorithms Given: Dumb.
m (→About this task: (corrected the link for real!)) |
(→Comment on Algorithms Given: Dumb.) |
||
Line 24:
: Language apart, the algorithm now works (at least, Smalltalk, C and Perl implementations, based on that, works).
: Anyone interested in writing better pseudocode (even in changing the current "language" keeping the same "code") is welcome of course! --[[User:ShinTakezou|ShinTakezou]] 09:04, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
::Hi, You've done sterling work. I was dumb. It just took a different explanation before I could 'get' it. On the Ceiling thing, I totally missed the the fact that the bottom of the brackets was missing and so mis-read it as plain old square brackets using a crap font.
::Their is still one outstanding point though: in the ref. I found, they stated that you had to pre-sort only once, for both X and Y ''before'' you entered the recursive routine or the sorts for Y would make the algorithm n(logn)**2 rather than nlogn. But I'm no expert in deriving O(n) notation. --[[User:Paddy3118|Paddy3118]] 12:27, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
| |||