Skip to content

Conversation

@SrinivasaSupreeth
Copy link

No description provided.

@super30admin
Copy link
Owner

Strengths:

  • Both solutions are correct and efficient, with optimal time and space complexity.
  • The code is clean, readable, and follows good practices.
  • Variable naming is appropriate and helps in understanding the logic.

Areas for Improvement:

  • Adding comments to explain the logic, especially in the merge solution, could enhance readability for others.
  • The removeDuplicates solution could include a brief comment explaining why k - 2 is used (to check the element two positions back).

Overall, the student has done an excellent job. Minor improvements in documentation would make the code even better.

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