ridvansg wrote: > carmelo is talking about a tree, I think that you don't ned to present > it as a graph to have the solution. >
Unless, of course, like many trees this one regards nodes at the same depth as 'siblings' and as such, connected...but as this was not specified by the OP, either assumption is valid. > I still can not prove this algorithm to be correct. Most 'valid' answers would require this at the basic level. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Algorithm Geeks" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/algogeeks -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
