about summary refs log tree commit diff
path: root/website/habitgarden/src/index.tsx
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
authorWilliam Carroll <wpcarro@gmail.com>2020-03-30T13·14+0100
committerWilliam Carroll <wpcarro@gmail.com>2020-03-30T13·14+0100
commit8d36c6d00fc2abba9ac04e9e2d4cc620e375d770 (patch)
tree46652ab67644affd902d15ee4154109eee95e75a /website/habitgarden/src/index.tsx
parent7e41aba8b7bf3b6ef450797739d8069a835a2af6 (diff)
Solve InterviewCake's compute nth Fibonacci
While the "Dynamic programming and recursion" section hosts this problem, the
optimal solution does not use recursion. Many cite the Fibonacci problem as a
quintessential dynamic programming question. I assume these people expect an
answer like:

```python
def fib(n):
  cache = {0: 0, 1: 1}
  def do_fib(n):
    if n in cache:
      return cache[n]
    else:
      cache[n - 1] = do_fib(n - 1)
      cache[n - 2] = do_fib(n - 2)
      return cache[n - 1] + cache[n - 2]
  return do_fib(n)
```

The cache turns the runtime of the classic Fibonacci solution...

```python
def fib(n):
  if n in {0, 1}:
    return n
  return fib(n - 1) + fib(n - 2)
```

... from O(2^n) to a O(n). But both the cache itself and the additional stacks
that the runtime allocates for each recursive call create an O(n) space
complexity.

InterviewCake wants the answer to be solved in O(n) time with O(1)
space. To achieve this, instead of solving fib(n) from the top-down, we solve it
from the bottom-up.

I found this problem to be satisfying to solve.
Diffstat (limited to 'website/habitgarden/src/index.tsx')
0 files changed, 0 insertions, 0 deletions