这个大的O标记对这个C ++代码正确吗? [英] Is this big O notation correct for this c++ code?

问题描述

目前，我的最佳情况为o(n)，最糟糕的情况为o(n).我不确定以下代码段是否正确，如果有人可以确认它正确或解释错误的原因，我将不胜感激.谢谢！

currently I have best case as o(n), worst case as o(n). I am unsure if this is correct for the following code segment and I would really appreciate if someone could confirm it is correct, or explain why it's wrong. Thanks!

template<typename T>
void vector_print(const T& vector, bool repeat)
{
    for (typename T::size_type i = 0; i < vector.size(); ++i)
    {
        for (typename T::size_type j = 0; j < vector.size(); ++j)
        {
            std::cout << vector[j] << ",";
        }
        std::cout << std::endl;

        if (!repeat) {
            break;
        }
        repeat = !repeat;
    }
}

推荐答案

外部循环永远不会执行两次以上，因此您已经得到 O(2 * vector.size())，减少为 O(vector.size()).

The outer loop is never going to be executed more than twice, so you've got O(2*vector.size()), which reduces to O(vector.size()).

所以您的回答对我来说似乎是正确的.

So your answer seems correct to me.

这篇关于这个大的O标记对这个C ++代码正确吗?的文章就介绍到这了，希望我们推荐的答案对大家有所帮助，也希望大家多多支持IT屋！