yeah no use of ascending(s,i) here...
thanks ashita for the correction....

reverse(stack *s){
   IsEmpty(s)
        return;
   top = pop(s);
   reverse(s);
   ascending(s, top);
}

ascending(stack *s, int top){
  IsEmpty(s){
     push(top);
     return;
  }
  i = pop(s);
  if(i > top){
     ascending(s, top);
     push(i);
  }
  else{
     push(top);
  }

}

On Sep 11, 6:22 pm, ashita dadlani <[email protected]> wrote:
> else{
>     ascending(s, i);
>     push(top);
>  }}
>
> @swinivas:why have you used ascending(s,i) here?
> On Sat, Sep 11, 2010 at 6:40 PM, Srinivas 
> <[email protected]>wrote:
>
> > reverse(stack *s){
> >   IsEmpty(s)
> >        return;
> >   top = pop(s);
> >   reverse(s);
> >   ascending(s, top);
> > }
> > ascending(stack *s, int top){
> >  IsEmpty(s){
> >     push(top);
> >     return;
> >  }
> >  i = pop(s);
> >  if(i > top){
> >     ascending(s, top);
> >     push(i);
> >  }
> >  else{
> >     ascending(s, i);
> >     push(top);
> >  }
> > }
>
> > Please let me know if it wont work..thanks
>
> > On Jul 18, 6:58 am, xyombie <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > What about a quick sort O(log n)
>
> > > void sort_stack(Stack *src, Stack *dst)
> > > {
> > >         if(! src->IsEmpty() )
> > >         {
> > >                 Stack smaller, larger;
> > >                 int pivot = src->Pop();
>
> > >                 while(! src->IsEmpty() )
> > >                 {
> > >                         int tmp = src->Pop();
> > >                         if(tmp < pivot)
> > >                                 smaller->Push(tmp);
> > >                         else
> > >                                 larger->Push(tmp);
> > >                 }
>
> > >                 sort_stack(smaller, dst);
> > >                 dst->Push(pivot);
> > >                 sort_stack(larger, dst);
> > >         }
>
> > > }
>
> > > On Jul 17, 9:28 am, vijay <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > Write a C program to sort a stack in ascending order. You should not
> > > > make any assumptions about how the stack is implemented. The following
> > > > are the only
> > > > functions that should be used to write this program:
> > > > Push | Pop | Top | IsEmpty | IsFull
> > > >  The algorithm is O(N^2) and appears below.
> > > > Do we have any other better solution which is less than O(n * n) ?
>
> > > > void sort_stack(Stack * src, Stack * dest)
> > > >  {
> > > >   while (!src->IsEmpty())
> > > >  {
> > > >    Int tmp = src->Pop();
> > > >    while(!dest->IsEmpty() && dest->Top() > tmp)
> > > >   {
> > > >        src->Push(dest->Pop());
> > > >   }
> > > >    dest->Push(tmp);
> > > >   }
>
> > > > }
>
> > --
> > 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]<algogeeks%[email protected]>
> > .
> > For more options, visit this group at
> >http://groups.google.com/group/algogeeks?hl=en.

-- 
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?hl=en.

Reply via email to