@nishant : your algo takes O(nlogn) time with higher constant behind this..... can't we write better than this ? @sairam : will u pls provide implementation logic of u'r idea ..
On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 12:43 PM, Sairam Ravu <[email protected]> wrote: > By merging smaller trees into larger trees we can obtain a much more > efficient solution. > > > > > -- > With love and regards, > Sairam Ravu > I M. Tech(CS) > Sri Sathya Sai Institute of Higher Learning > "To live life, you must think it, measure it, experiment with it, > dance it, paint it, draw it, and calculate it" > > -- > 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. > > -- **Please do not print this e-mail until urgent requirement. Go Green!! Save Papers <=> Save Trees *BharatKumar Bagana* **http://www.google.com/profiles/bagana.bharatkumar<http://www.google.com/profiles/bagana.bharatkumar> * Mobile +91 8056127652* <[email protected]> -- 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.
