Skip to content

Backtracking-2 Assignment Completed#1269

Open
Hriday-A wants to merge 1 commit into
super30admin:masterfrom
Hriday-A:master
Open

Backtracking-2 Assignment Completed#1269
Hriday-A wants to merge 1 commit into
super30admin:masterfrom
Hriday-A:master

Conversation

@Hriday-A
Copy link
Copy Markdown

No description provided.

@super30admin
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Owner

Subsets (subsets.java)

Strengths:

  1. The solution demonstrates good understanding of the backtracking pattern
  2. Two different approaches were explored (though one is commented out), showing depth of understanding
  3. Clear comments and documentation
  4. Proper use of backtracking to avoid unnecessary array copies
  5. Correct handling of the base case and result collection

Areas for Improvement:

  1. The commented-out first approach has a subtle bug - it adds the element to path before the second recursive call but doesn't properly restore state before returning. However, since it's commented out, this doesn't affect the final solution.
  2. The active solution could benefit from explaining the "pivot" concept more clearly in comments
  3. Consider adding a brief explanation of why we create new ArrayList<>(path) when adding to result

Minor Notes:

  • The solution correctly handles edge cases (empty input not possible per constraints, but handles single element)
  • The backtracking pattern (path.remove(path.size()-1)) is correctly implemented

VERDICT: PASS


Palindrome Partitioning (palindrome_partionining.java)

Strengths:

  • Clean, well-organized code that is easy to follow
  • Correct implementation of the backtracking pattern
  • Proper handling of the result copy (creating new ArrayList before adding)
  • Good method naming and separation of logic
  • Follows Java naming conventions

Areas for Improvement:

  • The solution is functionally equivalent to the reference and doesn't require significant changes
  • Minor optimization: Could consider using path.remove(path.size() - 1) with Integer type or just path.remove(path.size() - 1) which is already correct

VERDICT: NEEDS_IMPROVEMENT

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