链表part01:203 移除链表元素、707 链表设计 、206.反转链表

203 移除链表元素

这道题目主要是考虑头部节点是否要删除。 用2种方法,第一种方法针对头部节点进行特殊考虑。 

第二种方法是设置一个虚拟的节点让它和头部节点衔接起来 ,然后用常规while循环判断next节点的val值是否和target的值相等,这里的虚拟节点dummy永远会指向新的链表的头部节点,dummy.next =head . 

具体代码如下: 

方法一:

/**
 * 方法1
 * 时间复杂度 O(n)
 * 空间复杂度 O(1)
 * @param head
 * @param val
 * @return
 */
public ListNode removeElements(ListNode head, int val) {
    while(head!=null && head.val==val) {
        head = head.next;
    }
    ListNode curr = head;
    while(curr!=null && curr.next !=null) {
        if(curr.next.val == val){
            curr.next = curr.next.next;
        } else {
            curr = curr.next;
        }
    }
    return head;
}

方法二:

/**
 * Definition for singly-linked list.
 * public class ListNode {
 * int val;
 * ListNode next;
 * ListNode() {}
 * ListNode(int val) { this.val = val; }
 * ListNode(int val, ListNode next) { this.val = val; this.next = next; }
 * }
 */

class Solution {
    public ListNode removeElements(ListNode head, int val) {
        // 特殊处理头节点,看看它是否属于val,对它进行剔除,
        /**
         * 头节点特殊性: 由于头节点没有前驱节点,无法通过前一个节点来删除它,只能直接移动头指针。
         * 连续相同值的头节点: 如果链表开头有多个连续的值等于 val 的节点,需要逐个跳过它们,
         * 直到找到一个值不等于 val 的节点作为新的头节点。
         */
        ListNode dummy = new ListNode();
        dummy.next = head;
        ListNode curr = dummy;
        while (curr.next != null) {
            if (curr.next.val == val) {
                curr.next = curr.next.next;
            } else {
                curr = curr.next;
            }

        }
        return  dummy.next;

    }

}

707  链表设计 

这个题目的各个方法体,主要考察的还是对指针的理解。 考虑到边界问题,我们为了简化问题的复杂度,需要创建一个虚拟的头部节点head。这样我们就可以把头部节点情况和其他节点情况一视同仁,简化了复杂度。  

增加节点的过程,无论是插入到头节点之前,或者是中部,或者说是到尾部,这个过程都是需要先遍历找到当前index对应的节点的上一个节点。  然后我们通过设计pre节点的next的next,就会把当前的index节点删除掉。 

在插入节点中,如果index是负数,这种情况,我们得先把index 变为0,然后再进行插入逻辑。 

index=0后,会执行插入到头节点前的逻辑,这个符合预期。

注意:这个代码中的ListNode ,是默认已经创建好的对象,因为leetcode好像是之前已经有相关题目的定义,这里默认是可以调用的就行。  

代码如下:

class MyLinkedList {
    private ListNode head;
    private int size;
//无参数构造函数
    public MyLinkedList() {
        //创建虚拟头节点
        this.head =new ListNode(0);
        this.size=0;
    }
    
    public int get(int index) {
        ListNode curr =head ;
        if(index<0||index>=size){
            return -1;
        }
        for(int i=0;i<=index;i++){
            curr=curr.next;
        } 
        return curr.val ;   
    }
    
    public void addAtHead(int val) {
        ListNode curr =head;
        ListNode newNode = new ListNode(val);
        newNode.next=curr.next;
        head.next =newNode; 
        size++; 
    }
    
    public void addAtTail(int val) {
        ListNode curr =head;
        ListNode newNode = new ListNode(val);
        while(curr.next !=null){
            curr=curr.next ;
        }
        curr.next =newNode;
        size++;
        
    }
    
    public void addAtIndex(int index, int val) {
        ListNode newNode =new ListNode(val);
        ListNode pre= head;//插入节点的前驱节点一定要找到 
        //curr.next 为index的位置, cur之后插入,curr.next之前插入
        if(index>size){
            return;
        }
        //如果是index为负数,我们要在头节点前插入,跳过下面的for循环进行插入替换
        if(index<0){
            index=0;
        }
        for(int i=0;i<index;i++){
            pre=pre.next;
        }
        newNode.next=pre.next;
        pre.next= newNode;
        size++;
    }
    
    public void deleteAtIndex(int index) {
        if(index<0||index>=size){
            return ;
        }
        ListNode curr= head;
        for(int i=0;i <index;i++){
            curr=curr.next;
        }
        curr.next=curr.next.next;
        size--;  
    }
}

/**
 * Your MyLinkedList object will be instantiated and called as such:
 * MyLinkedList obj = new MyLinkedList();
 * int param_1 = obj.get(index);
 * obj.addAtHead(val);
 * obj.addAtTail(val);
 * obj.addAtIndex(index,val);
 * obj.deleteAtIndex(index);
 */

206.反转链表: 

在反转链表中,我们需要把链表的next指向进行调换。 我们可以使用一个pre虚拟的null节点和curr当前节点2个信息,从头依次进行调换方向:pre->curr  调换成 curr->pre; 并且要顺利找到原来链表中的第三个节点(curr后面的节点),我们需要在调转curr->pre之前,把第三个节点保存下来,避免curr->pre 调转后,第三个节点断了链接关系,找不到它。  

所以整体来讲,这个题目应该是三个指针的逻辑关系。 pre虚拟头节点,pre后紧跟的curr节点,以及curr之后的节点需要一个指针temp来保存它。 

原来的顺序依次调转,知道最后curr 为null这个时候,pre就是原来的的尾部,也就是现在的头部节点,调转结束。 所以while循环的判断逻辑是: curr ==null 就会停止循环(while(curr !=null)) 。 

这三个指针的顺序,我们得在pre和curr调转之前,做好原链表的第三个节点的临时储存。

所以顺序是: 

step1 : temp =存原始链表curr.next;

step2: 调转pre和curr  

注意:这里有个错误的写法如下:

        pre=curr;

        curr=pre;

这样写,最后结果就是都指向了curr节点,指向同一个节点。

问题解析:

  1. pre = curr 的作用

    • 这一步实际上是把 pre 更新为 curr,也就是说,现在 pre 指向了当前节点 curr
    • 此时 precurr 是指向同一个节点的。
  2. curr = pre 的影响

    • 在上一步操作后,precurr 都指向了相同的节点。
    • 然后我写了 curr = pre,其实是在将 curr 重新指向 pre
    • 因为 precurr 已经指向相同的节点,所以这个操作实际上不会改变 curr 的位置,只是让它继续指向自己。

综上再梳理一下:

  • 总体目标: 在反转链表的过程中,我们需要把链表中每个节点的 next 指向进行调换,从指向下一个节点,改为指向前一个节点。使用 precurr 两个指针。此外,我们还需要一个临时指针 temp 来保存原链表中的下一个节点的信息。

  • 步骤详细描述

    • 我们使用 三个指针precurrtemp。初始时,pre 设置为 null,因为反转后原链表的第一个节点将成为新的尾部,其 next 需要指向 null
    • curr 则是当前处理的节点,初始时设置为链表的头节点。
    • 为了防止反转操作导致链表中断,我们使用 temp 来暂存当前节点之后的那个节点(即原链表中的下一个节点)。
  • 逻辑顺序

    如此往复,直到 currnull,表示我们已经处理完了整个链表。

    • Step 1: 保存原链表中的下一个节点。temp = curr.next;
    • Step 2: 反转 currnext,使其指向 precurr.next = pre;
    • Step 3: 移动 precurr 指针,准备处理下一个节点。pre = curr; curr = temp;
  • 终止条件

    • 循环的终止条件是 curr == null,即当前节点遍历到了链表的末尾,链表已完成反转。

代码如下:

/**
 * Definition for singly-linked list.
 * public class ListNode {
 *     int val;
 *     ListNode next;
 *     ListNode() {}
 *     ListNode(int val) { this.val = val; }
 *     ListNode(int val, ListNode next) { this.val = val; this.next = next; }
 * }
 */
class Solution {
    public ListNode reverseList(ListNode head) {
        ListNode  pre = null; 
        ListNode curr =head;
        while(curr !=null){
            ListNode temp = curr.next ;
            curr.next= pre;
            pre =curr;
            curr=temp;
        }
        return  pre; 
    }
}

使用递归的思路来解决该问题:

递归反转链表中的顺序问题很重要,尤其是在递归中如何处理节点指向,可能确实会影响整体反转的实现。

递归反转链表:两种可能顺序的讨论

顺序 1:先反转指向,再进行递归调用

这种顺序的意思是:

  1. 先进行当前节点的反转,也就是 curr.next = pre,让当前节点的 next 指向前一个节点。
  2. 再进行递归调用,传递下一节点和当前节点作为参数,继续向下递归。

具体代码如下:

public ListNode reverse(ListNode curr, ListNode pre) {
    if (curr == null) {
        return pre; // 返回最终反转后的新头节点
    }

    // 首先将当前节点指向前一个节点,实现局部反转
    curr.next = pre;

    // 然后递归调用,将下一节点作为新的当前节点
    return reverse(curr.next, curr);
}
/**
 * Definition for singly-linked list.
 * public class ListNode {
 *     int val;
 *     ListNode next;
 *     ListNode() {}
 *     ListNode(int val) { this.val = val; }
 *     ListNode(int val, ListNode next) { this.val = val; this.next = next; }
 * }
 */
class Solution {
    public ListNode reverseList(ListNode head) {
        return  reverse(head,null);
    }
    public ListNode reverse (ListNode curr, ListNode pre){
        if(curr ==null){
            return pre;// 当到达链表的末尾,返回前一个节点,作为新头节点
        }
        ListNode temp= curr.next ;// 保存当前节点的下一个节点
        curr.next=pre;  // 反转当前节点的指向
        ListNode newPre =reverse(temp,curr);
        return  newPre;// 递归调用,返回反转后的新头节点
    }
}

在这个顺序中,首先对当前节点进行反转,然后将反转后的链表部分继续传递给递归函数,这样确保了每次递归调用时,节点的指向已经是反转后的。

为什么这种顺序是对的?

  • 在当前节点进行反转之后curr.next = pre,这确保了当前节点已经完成了反转。
  • 递归调用的参数传递:递归调用时,curr 变成了下一个节点,pre 变成了当前节点,这样每一层递归的操作都是在局部反转后继续进行。
  • 确保链表不丢失:因为在每次递归调用之前,当前节点的 next 指向已经被更新为 pre,所以整个链表的结构不会丢失。

递归过程示例:

假设链表是 1 -> 2 -> 3 -> null,那么递归的过程如下:

  1. 初始调用reverse(1, null)

    • 1.next = null,反转节点 1
    • 递归调用 reverse(2, 1)
  2. 第二层调用reverse(2, 1)

    • 2.next = 1,反转节点 2
    • 递归调用 reverse(3, 2)
  3. 第三层调用reverse(3, 2)

    • 3.next = 2,反转节点 3
    • 递归调用 reverse(null, 3)
  4. 终止条件curr == null,返回 pre,即节点 3

这样,递归回溯的过程中,我们的链表逐步被反转为 3 -> 2 -> 1 -> null

顺序 2:先递归,再反转指向

而先递归再反转的顺序是:

  1. 递归到链表末尾,然后开始反转。
  2. 递归返回时,再对当前节点进行反转

这种方式的实现代码如下:

public ListNode reverse(ListNode curr, ListNode pre) {
    // 基本情况:如果当前节点为空,则返回前一个节点作为新头节点
    if (curr == null) {
        return pre;
    }

    // 递归调用,传入当前节点作为前驱节点,传入下一个节点作为当前节点
    ListNode newHead = reverse(curr.next, curr);

    // 回溯过程中,反转当前节点的指向
    curr.next = pre;

    // 返回反转后的新头节点
    return newHead;
}

// 对外公开的接口,用于初始调用时设置参数
public ListNode reverseList(ListNode head) {
    return reverse(head, null); // 初始调用时,pre 为 null,curr 为 head
}

递归函数执行的具体流程

递归的执行可以拆分为两个阶段:

  1. 递归调用阶段(进入递归,压栈)
  2. 递归回溯阶段(回溯,弹栈并执行未完成的部分)

对于递归函数,所有的操作其实是由函数调用的顺序控制的,而不是简单的顺序代码执行。每次调用一个递归函数时,整个函数都会被压入调用栈中,只有在上一个递归调用结束之后,才会开始从调用栈中逐层弹出函数并继续执行其余的代码。因此,虽然函数里有 curr.next = pre 这样一行代码,它并不会在递归深入的过程中立即执行,而是会被推迟到递归返回(即回溯)时才执行。

调用栈的运作原理

代码再次回顾

我们以这个代码为例:

public ListNode reverse(ListNode curr, ListNode pre) {
    // 基本情况:如果当前节点为空,则返回前一个节点作为新头节点
    if (curr == null) {
        return pre;
    }

    // 递归调用,传入当前节点作为前驱节点,传入下一个节点作为当前节点
    ListNode newHead = reverse(curr.next, curr);

    // 回溯过程,反转当前节点的指向
    curr.next = pre;

    // 返回反转后的新头节点
    return newHead;
}
递归调用阶段(压栈)

reverse() 被调用时,程序的执行如下:

  1. 调用 reverse(1, null)

    • 首先检查 if (curr == null),由于 curr1,所以条件不成立。
    • 然后,执行递归调用 reverse(curr.next, curr),也就是 reverse(2, 1)
    • 注意:在此时,curr.next = pre; 并没有执行,因为还没有到这一步。当前递归帧被压入栈中,并等待 reverse(2, 1) 的结果。
  2. 调用 reverse(2, 1)

    • 检查 if (curr == null),由于 curr2,条件依然不成立。
    • 执行递归调用 reverse(curr.next, curr),也就是 reverse(3, 2)
    • 同样地,此时 curr.next = pre; 仍然没有执行,当前帧被压入栈中,等待 reverse(3, 2) 的结果。
  3. 调用 reverse(3, 2)

    • 再次检查 if (curr == null),由于 curr3,条件依然不成立。
    • 执行递归调用 reverse(curr.next, curr),也就是 reverse(null, 3)
    • curr.next = pre; 仍然没有执行,当前帧被压入栈中。
  4. 调用 reverse(null, 3)

    • 此时 curr == null,满足条件,返回 pre,也就是节点 3
递归回溯阶段(弹栈并执行 curr.next = pre

在递归调用到达基准条件后,开始从栈中逐层弹出并执行每个递归帧中的其余代码:

  1. 回溯到 reverse(3, 2)

    • 当前 curr 为节点 3pre 为节点 2
    • 现在执行 curr.next = pre;,即 3.next = 2,将节点 3next 指向 2
    • 然后 return newHead,此时 newHead 是节点 3,返回给上一层调用。
  2. 回溯到 reverse(2, 1)

    • 当前 curr 为节点 2pre 为节点 1
    • 现在执行 curr.next = pre;,即 2.next = 1,将节点 2next 指向 1
    • 然后返回 newHead(节点 3)。
  3. 回溯到 reverse(1, null)

    • 当前 curr 为节点 1prenull
    • 现在执行 curr.next = pre;,即 1.next = null,将节点 1next 指向 null
    • 然后返回 newHead(节点 3)。

为什么递归中的 curr.next = pre 没有在递归时立即执行?

这是因为在递归调用过程中,函数并没有执行到 curr.next = pre 这一行代码——实际上,所有在递归调用之后的代码都会在递归回溯时才执行。这是递归的执行机制所决定的:

  • 递归调用的性质:每次递归调用相当于函数的重新进入,每一次调用都会将当前函数的状态(包括局部变量等)压入调用栈。递归调用后,当前的递归帧进入等待状态,直到后续的递归调用完成返回结果,这个时候才会继续执行递归调用之后的代码。
  • 调用栈:递归调用的过程中,函数会被压入调用栈,每次函数调用都不会继续执行之后的代码,而是先等待后续调用完成,等回溯时再执行。

这就是为什么在递归调用中,虽然每个递归帧中都有 curr.next = pre; 这一行代码,但是它们都不会立即执行,而是等到递归回溯时才执行。

因此

  • 在递归调用过程中,函数会被压入栈中,递归调用之后的代码不会立即执行
  • 只有在递归的回溯阶段,函数会逐层从栈中弹出,才会执行到 curr.next = pre; 这一行代码。
  • 这就是为什么 curr.next = pre 会在整个递归深入完成后(即在回溯过程中)才执行。

详细地解释递归调用栈的工作原理,特别是每一次函数的递归调用如何进入栈以及如何从栈中弹出。

递归调用与回溯的栈顺序

首先,递归调用时,每个函数的调用都会被压入调用栈中,而在回溯阶段,栈会按照**后进先出(LIFO: Last In, First Out)**的顺序弹出。这意味着,最后被压入栈的函数,会最先弹出执行回溯部分的代码。

代码回顾

我们再回顾一下提到的代码:

public ListNode reverse(ListNode curr, ListNode pre) {
    if (curr == null) {
        return pre;  // 到达链表末尾,返回前一个节点作为新头节点
    }

    ListNode newHead = reverse(curr.next, curr);  // 递归调用
    curr.next = pre;  // 回溯阶段,反转指向
    return newHead;  // 返回反转后的新头节点
}

递归调用的过程分析

假设链表为 1 -> 2 -> 3 -> null,我们来一步一步分析递归调用和回溯的过程,特别是栈的运作:

递归调用阶段(压栈)

在递归调用阶段,程序不断调用自身并压入栈中,函数的状态(包括当前的局部变量和参数)被保存,以便后续回溯时可以继续执行。

  1. 调用 reverse(1, null)

    • curr1prenull
    • 调用 reverse(2, 1)
    • 此时 reverse(1, null) 被压入栈中,等待后续返回结果。
  2. 调用 reverse(2, 1)

    • curr2pre1
    • 调用 reverse(3, 2)
    • 此时 reverse(2, 1) 被压入栈中。
  3. 调用 reverse(3, 2)

    • curr3pre2
    • 调用 reverse(null, 3)
    • 此时 reverse(3, 2) 被压入栈中。
  4. 调用 reverse(null, 3)

    • currnull,满足递归终止条件,返回 pre,即节点 3
    • 此时,reverse(null, 3) 被压入栈中,但在满足条件后立即返回。

递归回溯阶段(弹栈)

现在开始回溯。递归函数会从栈中逐层弹出并执行递归调用之后的代码。栈的弹出顺序是后进先出,所以我们来看如何逐层弹出栈:

  1. 弹出 reverse(null, 3)

    • 这层递归并没有后续代码执行,因为 curr == null 时直接返回 pre,也就是返回节点 3 作为新的头节点。
    • 没有真正意义上的回溯,因为它是基准情况直接返回,所以你会看到它只是返回新头节点,并没有涉及节点的反转。
  2. 回溯到 reverse(3, 2)

    • 现在回到 reverse(3, 2),其中 curr 为节点 3pre 为节点 2
    • 继续执行 curr.next = pre,也就是 3.next = 2,实现反转,使得节点 3 指向节点 2
    • 然后返回 newHead,即节点 3
  3. 回溯到 reverse(2, 1)

    • 现在回到 reverse(2, 1),其中 curr 为节点 2pre 为节点 1
    • 继续执行 curr.next = pre,也就是 2.next = 1,实现反转,使得节点 2 指向节点 1
    • 然后返回 newHead,即节点 3
  4. 回溯到 reverse(1, null)

    • 现在回到 reverse(1, null),其中 curr 为节点 1prenull
    • 继续执行 curr.next = pre,也就是 1.next = null,实现反转,使得节点 1 成为链表的尾部。
    • 返回 newHead,即节点 3

为什么不是回溯到 reverse(null, 3)

reverse(null, 3) 其实是在遇到基准条件时立即返回,并没有其他代码需要执行,这意味着它的返回不会执行任何额外的操作,而是直接返回结果给上一级的调用。这就是为什么在回溯的过程中,我们看到的首先是从 reverse(3, 2) 开始执行指针反转。

  • reverse(null, 3) 的作用只是终止递归,并返回最终的新头节点,而不涉及任何指针操作。
  • 实际的回溯操作是从 reverse(3, 2) 开始的,这个地方才是我们在调用栈弹出时真正需要处理节点指针反转的地方。

总结

  • 递归到达基准条件后 (reverse(null, 3)) 返回的新头节点,然后递归开始逐层回溯。
  • 回溯阶段reverse(3, 2) 开始,逐层执行 curr.next = pre,逐步反转节点的指向。
  • 基准条件的递归调用 reverse(null, 3) 不涉及指针反转,它只是单纯地返回新头节点,因此并不是回溯开始反转链表的地方。

所以,回溯并不真正从 reverse(null, 3) 开始,因为这一层只是满足基准条件并直接返回结果,而实际的反转是从倒数第二层开始执行的。

回头看2种不同递归,为什么顺序1的顺序更直观?

结合三指针的逻辑,递归反转链表的过程可以通过以下几点来理解为什么它是直观且合理的:

  • 立即反转当前节点的指向:每次反转操作之后,当前节点与前一个节点的关系就已经完成,这样避免了递归调用后指针丢失的风险。
  • 递归参数明确:每次递归调用时,都是在明确了当前节点的指向之后,传递下一个节点。这确保了递归回溯的时候节点关系已经完全处理好。

结论

  • 先反转,再递归调用的顺序在逻辑上是完全合理的,它确保在递归调用前已经反转了节点的指向,这样不会丢失节点的连接,保证整个链表能够正确反转。
  • 先递归,再反转的方式也可以实现反转,只是实现方式略有不同,操作的步骤在递归回溯时完成。

<think>We are given a code template for merging two sorted linked lists with dummy head nodes. The requirement: - Both input lists have a dummy head node (which means the actual data starts from list->next). - We are to merge them into a new sorted linked list (with a dummy head node as well). - We do not remove duplicate elements. - We guarantee that the linked lists can be destroyed (meaning we can manipulate the pointers arbitrarily). Steps: 1. We create a new dummy head node for the merged list. 2. We traverse both lists (starting from the first actual node, i.e., list1->next and list2->next) and compare the values. 3. We append the node with the smaller value to the merged list and move the pointer of that list forward. 4. When one list is exhausted, we append the rest of the other list. 5. We return the new dummy head node. Important: Since we are allowed to destroy the original lists, we are just rearranging pointers. However, note: The original lists have dummy head nodes. We must delete the dummy head nodes of the input lists? But the problem says "guarantee that the linked lists can be destroyed". It doesn't require us to delete the dummy heads of the input lists? But if we are creating a new dummy head for the result, then the input lists' dummy heads are not used in the result. Actually, the problem says: "output result linked list's head pointer" (which is the dummy head of the merged list). Also note: We are to merge the two lists without removing duplicates. Implementation: Let's denote: list1 and list2 are the dummy head nodes of the two input lists. We start the merging from: list1->next and list2->next. We create: dummy = (NODE*)malloc(sizeof(NODE)); // or use new in C++? But the code is in C-style? The template uses typedef struct. Since the function signature is in C-style (using struct and typedef), we assume we are writing in C. Steps in code: NODE dummy; // We can create a dummy node on the stack? But we must return a pointer. So we allocate? But the return type is NODE*, and we are to return the head of the merged list (which is a dummy node). Alternatively, we can create a dummy node and then return it. But we must manage memory. Since the requirement says "guarantee that the linked lists can be destroyed", it implies we are allowed to free the original dummy nodes? However, note that the problem does not specify whether we should free the original dummy nodes. But we are only to merge the lists. We are going to leave the original dummy nodes? Actually, we are not going to use them in the merged list. We'll create a new dummy node for the result. Steps: NODE* dummy_result = (NODE*)malloc(sizeof(NODE)); dummy_result->next = NULL; NODE* tail = dummy_result; // tail pointer to build the merged list. NODE* p1 = list1->next; // first actual node of list1 NODE* p2 = list2->next; // first actual node of list2 while (p1 != NULL && p2 != NULL) { if (p1->value <= p2->value) { tail->next = p1; p1 = p1->next; } else { tail->next = p2; p2 = p2->next; } tail = tail->next; } // If one list is not empty, append the rest. if (p1 != NULL) { tail->next = p1; } else { tail->next = p2; } // Now, we have merged the lists. But note: the original dummy nodes of list1 and list2 are still there. // The problem says "guarantee that the linked lists can be destroyed", meaning we can deallocate them? // However, the problem does not require us to deallocate the original dummy nodes in this function? // But if we leave them, then the caller might not know to free them? // But note: the problem says "three linked lists" (the two input and the output) should be destroyable. // We are returning the merged list (which has a new dummy node and then the merged nodes). The caller can then free the two original dummy nodes? // Since we are only required to write the function, we don't deallocate the original dummy nodes here. return dummy_result; However, wait: what about the original dummy nodes of list1 and list2? They are now pointing to parts of the merged list? Actually, we set p1 = list1->next. Then we move p1. The list1 node itself is not touched. Similarly for list2. So the original lists become: list1: dummy_node1 -> ... (but we took away the chain from dummy_node1->next and merged it) So now list1->next is still set but we moved the nodes away. So if the caller frees list1 and list2, they should be careful because the next pointers of the dummy nodes are now pointing to the merged list? To avoid any issues, we should set the next pointers of the original dummy nodes to NULL? But the problem does not specify. Alternatively, note the requirement: "guarantee that the linked lists can be destroyed". We must ensure that when the caller destroys the original lists (without the merged list), they can safely free the memory. But if we leave the dummy nodes of list1 and list2 pointing to the merged list, then if the caller frees the dummy nodes and then uses the merged list, that might be okay because the merged list is independent? However, the problem says "three linked lists" (so the two input lists and the output list) are separate and destroyable? Actually, after we merge, the nodes from list1 and list2 are now in the merged list. So the two input lists (including the dummy nodes) should be destroyed without affecting the merged list. Therefore, we must detach the original dummy nodes so that they become independent (only the dummy node). Then the caller can free the dummy nodes and the merged list remains. How to do that? We can set the list1->next and list2->next to NULL after we take the nodes? But the problem does not require us to change the original lists? It only says we can destroy the linked lists (meaning the entire data structure including the dummy nodes). Actually, if the caller destroys the two input lists, they should free the dummy nodes and then the rest? But we have taken the rest nodes to the merged list. So if they free the dummy nodes without freeing the rest, that's okay? But if they try to free the entire list (dummy and then the chain) that would be a problem because the chain is now in the merged list. Therefore, to be safe, we should set the original dummy nodes to point to NULL so that when the caller frees them, they don't free the merged list. However, the problem says: "in the given code template", and the template function does not take the lists by reference (it takes NODE*). So we are passing the pointers by value. We cannot change the original list1 and list2 pointers (to set them to NULL) because they are passed by value. But we can change the content of the node? We have the list1 and list2 pointers. We can do: list1->next = NULL; list2->next = NULL; But is that acceptable? The problem says "guarantee that the linked lists can be destroyed". This will break the chain from the dummy nodes, so the original lists now become just the dummy nodes. Then the caller can free the dummy nodes without affecting the merged list. However, note: the problem says "output result linked list's head pointer", and we are creating a new dummy node. Therefore, the merged list has a new dummy node and then the merged chain. The merged chain is the original chains of list1 and list2 (without their dummy nodes). So if we set list1->next and list2->next to NULL, then the original lists are just the dummy nodes and they can be freed independently. Steps added: ... after we extract p1 and p2, we do: list1->next = NULL; list2->next = NULL; But wait: what if the caller wants to use the original lists after merging? Probably not, because we are merging and the requirement says "destroyable". But to be safe, we break the link. Alternatively, it might be the caller's responsibility? However, the problem says "guarantee that the linked lists can be destroyed". Therefore, we must leave the state such that the caller can destroy each linked list independently. Therefore, we will set the next of the original dummy nodes to NULL. Code: NODE* list_merge(NODE* list1, NODE* list2) { // Create a new dummy node for the result. NODE* dummy_result = (NODE*)malloc(sizeof(NODE)); dummy_result->next = NULL; NODE* tail = dummy_result; // Start from the first actual node of list1 and list2. NODE* p1 = list1->next; NODE* p2 = list2->next; // Break the original dummy nodes' links to the lists so that they are isolated (only dummy node). list1->next = NULL; list2->next = NULL; while (p1 && p2) { if (p1->value <= p2->value) { tail->next = p1; p1 = p1->next; } else { tail->next = p2; p2 = p2->next; } tail = tail->next; } if (p1) { tail->next = p1; } else { tail->next = p2; } return dummy_result; } Note: We are not freeing the original dummy nodes here because the caller might want to use them? Or the caller will free them? The problem does not specify. But we broke the link so that the original lists (which now consist of only the dummy node) can be freed without affecting the merged list. Also note: we are not removing duplicates, so we include duplicates. However, the problem says "merge two sorted linked lists". We are doing a standard merge. But what if one of the lists is empty? If list1 is empty (so list1->next is NULL), then p1 is NULL. Similarly for list2. Then we break the link (list1->next is already NULL, we set to NULL again? It's okay). Then the while loop doesn't run, and we set tail->next to the non-empty one? If both are empty, then tail->next becomes NULL. So it works. But note: what if the lists are not NULL-terminated? They are singly linked lists and must be NULL-terminated. We assume the input lists are properly formed. Also note: the problem says the lists have a dummy head node. Even if the list is empty, the dummy head node exists (with next=NULL). Therefore, our code should work. However, we are using malloc. We must remember to free the dummy nodes of the original lists? Not in this function. Let me test with an example: list1: dummy1 -> 1 -> 3 -> NULL list2: dummy2 -> 2 -> 4 -> NULL We create dummy_result. p1 = dummy1->next = 1 p2 = dummy2->next = 2 Then we set dummy1->next = NULL, dummy2->next = NULL. Then we merge: dummy_result -> 1 -> 2 -> 3 -> 4 -> NULL And we return dummy_result. The caller can then free: free(dummy1); // because dummy1->next is NULL, so it's just the dummy node. free(dummy2); // same. And the merged list is independent. Therefore, the code is as below. But note: the problem says the input lists have a dummy head and we output a new dummy head. Also note: the problem says "typedef struct __NODE", so we use that. One more point: what if the lists have duplicate values? We include them so no problem. We are using the standard merge procedure. Let's write the code accordingly. However, note that the problem says "code template", so we fill in the function body. Important: We must not leak memory. By breaking the links, we ensure that the original dummy nodes are isolated and can be freed without affecting the merged list. But what about the nodes in the merged list? They are now owned by the merged list. The caller will have to free the entire merged list (including the dummy node we created) at some point. So the function returns a dummy node for the merged list. The caller is responsible for freeing all three lists: list1 (the dummy node), list2 (the dummy node), and the returned merged list (which includes the dummy node and the chain). We are good. Code: #include <stdlib.h> // for malloc typedef struct __NODE { int value; struct __NODE* next; } NODE; NODE* list_merge(NODE* list1, NODE* list2) { // Create a new dummy node for the merged list. NODE* dummy_result = (NODE*)malloc(sizeof(NODE)); dummy_result->next = NULL; // Start pointers for the first actual nodes of the two lists. NODE* p1 = list1->next; NODE* p2 = list2->next; // Break the original lists to isolate the dummy nodes. list1->next = NULL; list2->next = NULL; // Tail of the merged list. NODE* tail = dummy_result; // Merge the lists. while (p1 != NULL && p2 != NULL) { if (p1->value <= p2->value) { tail->next = p1; p1 = p1->next; } else { tail->next = p2; p2 = p2->next; } tail = tail->next; } // Append the remaining part of either list. tail->next = (p1 != NULL) ? p1 : p2; return dummy_result; } Let me test with one list empty: list1: dummy1 -> NULL list2: dummy2 -> 1->2->NULL p1 = NULL, p2 = 1. After breaking: list1->next=NULL, list2->next=NULL. Then while loop doesn't run, we set tail->next = p2 (which is 1->2->NULL). Then return dummy_result -> 1->2->NULL. This is correct. But note: what if both are empty? Then we return a dummy node with next=NULL. Correct. Therefore, the code should be as above. However, the problem says "with empty head node". Our new list has an empty head node (dummy_result) and then the merged chain. So we meet the requirement. Now, let me write the code accordingly. Important: We are using malloc. We assume that the caller will free the memory. Also note: the problem does not specify the language, but the template is in C. So we write in C. We'll write the function as described. But note: the problem says "given code template", so we must only fill in the function body and not change the signature. We have filled the function body. Let me write it. </think>根据要求,以下实现了合并两个带空头节点有序单链表的函数。该函数会创建一个新的空头节点作为合并后链表的头节点,保持原有节点的内存结构不变,确保所有链表都可安全销毁,并输出结果链表的头节点指针: ```c typedef struct __NODE { int value; struct __NODE* next; } NODE; NODE* list_merge(NODE* list1, NODE* list2) { // 创建新的空头节点 NODE* dummy = (NODE*)malloc(sizeof(NODE)); dummy->next = NULL; NODE* cur = dummy; // 指向第一个实际节点(跳过头节点) NODE* p1 = list1->next; NODE* p2 = list2->next; // 断开原头节点的链接 (确保可安全销毁) list1->next = NULL; list2->next = NULL; // 合并两个有序链表 while (p1 != NULL && p2 != NULL) { if (p1->value <= p2->value) { cur->next = p1; p1 = p1->next; } else { cur->next = p2; p2 = p2->next; } cur = cur->next; } // 连接剩余部分 cur->next = (p1 != NULL) ? p1 : p2; return dummy; } ``` ### 关键实现说明: 1. **空头节点处理**: - 输入链表 `list1` 和 `list2` 都包含空头节点(`list->next` 开始为有效数据) - 创建新的空头节点 `dummy` 作为结果链表的头节点 2. **内存安全保证**: - 通过 `list1->next = NULL` 和 `list2->next = NULL` 断开原链表链接 - 原头节点成为独立节点,可被安全销毁 - 新链表节点使用原有内存,避免二次释放问题 3. **合并逻辑**: - 时间复杂度:$O(n+m)$(n、m 为两链表长度) - 空间复杂度:$O(1)$(仅需常数额外空间) - 保留所有重复元素(包括原链表中的重复值) 4. **边界处理**: - 当某链表为空时,自动连接另一链表剩余部分 - 双空链表输入时返回空头节点 ### 示例调用: ```c // 创建链表1: 头节点->1->3->NULL NODE* list1 = (NODE*)malloc(sizeof(NODE)); NODE* a1 = (NODE*)malloc(sizeof(NODE)); a1->value = 1; NODE* a2 = (NODE*)malloc(sizeof(NODE)); a2->value = 3; list1->next = a1; a1->next = a2; a2->next = NULL; // 创建链表2: 头节点->2->4->NULL NODE* list2 = (NODE*)malloc(sizeof(NODE)); NODE* b1 = (NODE*)malloc(sizeof(NODE)); b1->value = 2; NODE* b2 = (NODE*)malloc(sizeof(NODE)); b2->value = 4; list2->next = b1; b1->next = b2; b2->next = NULL; // 合并并输出结果 (头节点->1->2->3->4->NULL) NODE* merged = list_merge(list1, list2); for (NODE* p = merged->next; p; p = p->next) { printf("%d ", p->value); // 输出: 1 2 3 4 } // 安全销毁所有链表 free(list1); // 释放原链表1头节点 free(list2); // 释放原链表2头节点 // 销毁合并链表 (包括新头节点) while (merged) { NODE* temp = merged; merged = merged->next; free(temp); } ``` ### 相关问题: 1. 如何验证合并后链表的内存安全性? 2. 如果要求不修改原链表结构(保持原链表完整),代码需要如何调整? 3. 如何处理循环链表或含环链表的合并场景? 4. 如何优化该算法在大型链表排序中的性能? 5. 在并发环境下合并链表需要考虑哪些线程安全问题?[^1] [^1]: 引用自用户提供的链表合并实现方案和内存管理要求。
评论
添加红包

请填写红包祝福语或标题

红包个数最小为10个

红包金额最低5元

当前余额3.43前往充值 >
需支付:10.00
成就一亿技术人!
领取后你会自动成为博主和红包主的粉丝 规则
hope_wisdom
发出的红包
实付
使用余额支付
点击重新获取
扫码支付
钱包余额 0

抵扣说明:

1.余额是钱包充值的虚拟货币,按照1:1的比例进行支付金额的抵扣。
2.余额无法直接购买下载,可以购买VIP、付费专栏及课程。

余额充值