Skip to content

Done Array 1#1983

Open
Nav0708 wants to merge 1 commit into
super30admin:masterfrom
Nav0708:master
Open

Done Array 1#1983
Nav0708 wants to merge 1 commit into
super30admin:masterfrom
Nav0708:master

Conversation

@Nav0708
Copy link
Copy Markdown

@Nav0708 Nav0708 commented May 30, 2026

No description provided.

@super30admin
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Owner

Product Except Self (Problem-1.py)

Strengths:

  • Correctly implements the optimal O(n) two-pass algorithm
  • Clear and descriptive comments explaining the approach
  • Good variable naming conventions
  • Efficient use of the result array as both storage and working space
  • Properly handles the problem constraints

Areas for Improvement:

  • The print(res) statement on line 11 appears to be for debugging and should be removed in production code
  • Could add input validation for edge cases (though not strictly necessary given constraints)
  • The comment "Time Complexity : O(2n)" could be simplified to O(n) since 2n is still O(n)

Minor suggestions:

  • Consider adding type hints for better code documentation
  • The solution is already quite optimal; further optimizations would be minimal

VERDICT: PASS


Diagonal Traverse (Problem-2.py)

Strengths:

  • Clean and readable implementation with good variable naming
  • Correct handling of all boundary conditions
  • Optimal time and space complexity
  • Well-commented code explaining the approach
  • Proper input validation with the if not mat or not mat[0] check

Areas for Improvement:

  • The unused loop variable k could be replaced with _ to indicate it's intentionally unused
  • Could add a brief docstring at the class/method level for better documentation
  • The comments are good but could be slightly more concise

The solution is functionally equivalent to the reference solution and demonstrates a solid understanding of the diagonal traversal problem.

VERDICT: PASS


Spiral Matrix (Problem-3.py)

Strengths:

  • Excellent documentation with time/space complexity annotations and a clear three-line explanation
  • Clean, readable code with meaningful variable names
  • Proper handling of edge cases (odd-dimension matrices) with boundary checks
  • Consistent use of comments to explain the approach

Areas for Improvement:

  • The code is functionally equivalent to the reference solution but uses different variable names (up/down vs top/bottom). Either naming convention is fine, but consistency with common LeetCode solutions might be helpful for future reference.
  • Minor: Could potentially combine the boundary check conditions into the while loop, but the current approach is clear and correct.

The solution demonstrates a solid understanding of the problem and implements a standard algorithm effectively.

VERDICT: PASS

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants