I have this method:
public static int what(String str, char start, char end)
{
int count=0;
for(int i=0;i<str.length(); i++) {
if(str.charAt(i) == start)
{
for(int j=i+1;j<str.length(); j++)
{
if(str.charAt(j) == end)
count++;
}
}
}
return count;
}
What I need to find is:
1) What is it doing? Answer: counting the total number of end occurrences after EACH (or is it? Not specified in the assignment, point 3 depends on this) start.
2) What is its complexity? Answer: the first loops iterates over the string completely, so it's at least O(n), the second loop executes only if start char is found and even then partially (index at which start was found + 1). Although, big O is all about worst case no? So in the worst case, start is the 1st char & the inner iteration iterates over the string n-1 times, the -1 is a constant so it's n. But, the inner loop won't be executed every outer iteration pass, statistically, but since big O is about worst case, is it correct to say the complexity of it is O(n^2)? Ignoring any constants and the fact that in 99.99% of times the inner loop won't execute every outer loop pass.
3) Rewrite it so that complexity is lower.
What I'm not sure of is whether start occurs at most once or more, if once at most, then method can be rewritten using one loop (having a flag indicating whether start has been encountered and from there on incrementing count at each end occurrence), yielding a complexity of O(n).
In case though, that start can appear multiple times, which most likely it is, because assignment is of a Java course and I don't think they would make such ambiguity.
Solving, in this case, is not possible using one loop... WAIT! Yes it is..!
Just have a variable, say, inc to be incremented each time start is encountered & used to increment count each time end is encountered after the 1st start was found:
inc = 0, count = 0
if (current char == start) inc++
if (inc > 0 && current char == end) count += inc
This would also yield a complexity of O(n)? Because there is only 1 loop.
Yes I realize I wrote a lot hehe, but what I also realized is that I understand a lot better by forming my thoughts into words...
