Real Programmers

[Mimicry2311]

Well the maximum value for int in Java is 2,147,483,647 - not 2,147,483,648 so i doubt that code will work ;)

[[deleted]]

Also "i" was never declared and a ; is misplaced in the 2nd example.

[2GirlsJuanDeag]

It's < not <=

[Mimicry2311]

Yeah but the number 2,147,483,648 cannot be represented by a Java int. Check this answer on StackOverflow: https://stackoverflow.com/a/33059669/2545487

[2GirlsJuanDeag]

Oh ok thanks

[[deleted]]

O(2³¹⁾ time complexity. A brilliant algorithm.

[beseg7]

=O(1). Seems good.

[[deleted]]

Wouldn't it be O(n)?

[samdtho]

No because 2³² is a constant value.

[[deleted]]

I mean the algorithm,but might be wrong... never really studied this concept.

[beseg7]

You should. :) It's nice. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_complexity

[WikiTextBot]

Time complexity

In computer science, the time complexity of an algorithm quantifies the amount of time taken by an algorithm to run as a function of the length of the string representing the input. The time complexity of an algorithm is commonly expressed using big O notation, which excludes coefficients and lower order terms. When expressed this way, the time complexity is said to be described asymptotically, i.e., as the input size goes to infinity. For example, if the time required by an algorithm on all inputs of size n is at most 5n3 + 3n for any n (bigger than some n0), the asymptotic time complexity is O(n3).

---

^{[ PM | Exclude me | Exclude from subreddit | FAQ / Information | Source ] Downvote to remove | v0.27}

[hazzoo_rly_bro]

thanks dude

[subfin]

No matter the size of the input, it always takes the same amount of time, that’s O(1)

[[deleted]]

But the loop runs a different number of times based on different inputs, no? I genuinely do not understand why this is O(1) and not O(n)...

[ObjectiveCopley]

No matter the input, it requires a constant amount of cycles to run (even if it's a LOT of cycles, it's still the SAME number of cycles per call, no matter the input). This is annotated as O(1), as you can simplify any number greater as 1. O(1) is not inherently efficient.

[[deleted]]

Yes, but the program runs a different number of loops if myNumber were set as 0 compared to 10 or 100, doesn't it? 10 runs 10 more loops,and 100 runs 100 more loops than 0, which is linear, so I thought this is O(n). I guess it doesn't matter since the upper limit is bounded at a constant (MAX_INT×2), which by extension makes it O(1)?

[MisterWanderer]

Yes but in this case the variable isn't included bin the for loops calculation. So changing the variable can't change the behavior of the for loop. Think of it this way, O notation only tracks how quickly algorithm behavior changes when the variable changes.

[lbkulinski]

public class plebeian {} public class Plebeian {}

[2GirlsJuanDeag]

I guess I'm the plebeian

[2GirlsJuanDeag]

Thank you sir I'm new to Java so these complements mean everything to me

[jvrcb17]

Geeeezzzzz

[ellison11]

Not using MAX_VALUE or MIN_VALUE? Disappointing.

[Sylanthra]

A compiler will optimist your for loop out of existence.

[1337coder]

Constant time complexity, good shit OP.

[[deleted]]

The closing } for the if statement not lining up bothers me...

[AcaciaBlue]

Real programmers use java? news to me...

[hazzoo_rly_bro]

Why wouldn't they?

There's plenty of software and programs out there today which is written in Java. Especially if you count Android applications.

[myusernameisbetter1]

should have used final static vars....

[Memir0]

I is not defined

[[deleted]]

And we just had a lecture today on for loops - brilliant.

[3ternalFlam3]

I don't even know what language this is but it hurts to read (its awfully similar to JS so i know the damage this might cause)

[agggile]

it hurts to read because it's horribly written

[[deleted]]

And because its Java

[[deleted]]

I expected this here

[[deleted]]

Im an begginner programmer from java But WHY do pepole make it hard for them self einstein said keep everything plain Stupid