I just wrote a little test and I think you are correct.
I'll look at it a little more and commit the fix if needed.
Thanks!
Otis
--- "M.J. Bomhoff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> You commented on my bug as follows:
> > Are you sure about that?
> > This is what the code looks like. As far as I can tell this
> should
> take care of
> > the last element, as well, no?
>
>
> > public final void clear() {
> > for (int i = 0; i < size; i++)
> > heap[i] = null;
> > size = 0;
> > }
>
> imagine adding one element:
>
> you call put(element);
> the element gets put at heap[1], because size is incremented before
> the
> heap[size] = element gets called.
> then we call upheap(). This changes nothing, because we only have one
>
> element.
> so we have:
>
> heap[0] == null
> heap[1] == element
> ...
>
> now we call clear() and heap[0] gets set to null, but heap[1] remains
>
> the same...
>
> Or did I miss something? In that case I'm really sorry I bothered
> you...
>
> greetings,
>
> Matthijs Bomhoff
>
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup
http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
