Message from C, C++ talks

June 2019

— Thanks btw, nice approach

— NP, I still not completely sure if it works :D

— I think it will work

— Yes

— 

Oh, and also, I think the removement of elements can be eliminated here somehow. It can be faster without removement, also in real world situation you may want to keep the data immutable.

— Also if I remove elements then step 1.2.3 messes up

— Not waiting for tommorow morning. I'm doing it now

— No, it shouldn't, because you don't need to save value of removed item (it doesn't matter what value the deleted item had)

Message permanent page

— Ok, I'm trying.

— I tried and the code doesn't works😢.

— Ignore unnecessary declared variables.

— Thanks

— Welcome

— Welcome

— Oh, yeah, there's is a mistake in my previous algorithm.

The original algorithm can delete several consequent values in one iteration (I didn't consider this) but stops deleting values when it incounters one that was not bigger than previous one. Neighboring values change over iterations, but the good thing, that they change only from left to right.

So we need to find biggest count of small ranges of ascending values inside bigger ranges between the approved values (that will go to the final list).

Message permanent page