Cleaner way to handle double pointer in C++ BST?
I have an implementation for my first binary search tree in C++. I was wondering if there was some cleaner way to avoid using the double pointer in the way I have my code setup? Such as on one line I have:
(*node)->left = insert(&((*node)->left),value);
Which seems a bit "messy", but it almost seems necessary for the way I have implemented the BST. Maybe I am possibly missing a way I can change the syntax slightly to achieve the same result? I understand that I can have a double pointer as a parameter for my functions, but I have been told that it is not the standard in C++. I have my code posted below, along with how I am testing it.I am trying to prepare for technical interviews so any feedback is welcome.
#include<stdio.h>
#include<stdlib.h>
#include<iostream>
struct Node
{
int data;
Node *left, *right;
};
// A utility function to create a new BST node
Node* newNode(int data)
{
Node *temp = new Node();
temp->data = data;
temp->left = NULL;
temp->right = NULL;
return temp;
}
// A utility function to do inorder traversal of BST
void inorder(Node **root)
{
if (*root != NULL)
{
inorder(&((*root)->left));
printf("%d n", (*root)->data);
inorder(&((*root)->right));
}
}
/* A utility function to insert a new node with given key in BST */
Node* insert(Node** node, int value)
{
if(*node==NULL){
return newNode(value);
}
if((*node)->data > value){
(*node)->left = insert(&((*node)->left),value);
}
else if((*node)->data < value){
(*node)->right = insert(&((*node)->right),value);
}
return *node;
}
// Driver Program to test above functions
int main()
{
/* Let us create following BST
50
/
30 70
/ /
20 40 60 80 */
Node *root = NULL;
root = insert(&root, 50);
insert(&root, 30);
insert(&root, 20);
insert(&root, 40);
insert(&root, 70);
insert(&root, 60);
insert(&root, 80);
// print inoder traversal of the BST
inorder(&root);
return 0;
}
c++ algorithm binary-search
asked 4 mins ago
PulsePulse
101
New contributor
Pulse is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |
I have an implementation for my first binary search tree in C++. I was wondering if there was some cleaner way to avoid using the double pointer in the way I have my code setup? Such as on one line I have:
(*node)->left = insert(&((*node)->left),value);
Which seems a bit "messy", but it almost seems necessary for the way I have implemented the BST. Maybe I am possibly missing a way I can change the syntax slightly to achieve the same result? I understand that I can have a double pointer as a parameter for my functions, but I have been told that it is not the standard in C++. I have my code posted below, along with how I am testing it.I am trying to prepare for technical interviews so any feedback is welcome.
#include<stdio.h>
#include<stdlib.h>
#include<iostream>
struct Node
{
int data;
Node *left, *right;
};
// A utility function to create a new BST node
Node* newNode(int data)
{
Node *temp = new Node();
temp->data = data;
temp->left = NULL;
temp->right = NULL;
return temp;
}
// A utility function to do inorder traversal of BST
void inorder(Node **root)
{
if (*root != NULL)
{
inorder(&((*root)->left));
printf("%d n", (*root)->data);
inorder(&((*root)->right));
}
}
/* A utility function to insert a new node with given key in BST */
Node* insert(Node** node, int value)
{
if(*node==NULL){
return newNode(value);
}
if((*node)->data > value){
(*node)->left = insert(&((*node)->left),value);
}
else if((*node)->data < value){
(*node)->right = insert(&((*node)->right),value);
}
return *node;
}
// Driver Program to test above functions
int main()
{
/* Let us create following BST
50
/
30 70
/ /
20 40 60 80 */
Node *root = NULL;
root = insert(&root, 50);
insert(&root, 30);
insert(&root, 20);
insert(&root, 40);
insert(&root, 70);
insert(&root, 60);
insert(&root, 80);
// print inoder traversal of the BST
inorder(&root);
return 0;
}
c++ algorithm binary-search
asked 4 mins ago
PulsePulse
101
New contributor
Pulse is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |
I have an implementation for my first binary search tree in C++. I was wondering if there was some cleaner way to avoid using the double pointer in the way I have my code setup? Such as on one line I have:
(*node)->left = insert(&((*node)->left),value);
Which seems a bit "messy", but it almost seems necessary for the way I have implemented the BST. Maybe I am possibly missing a way I can change the syntax slightly to achieve the same result? I understand that I can have a double pointer as a parameter for my functions, but I have been told that it is not the standard in C++. I have my code posted below, along with how I am testing it.I am trying to prepare for technical interviews so any feedback is welcome.
#include<stdio.h>
#include<stdlib.h>
#include<iostream>
struct Node
{
int data;
Node *left, *right;
};
// A utility function to create a new BST node
Node* newNode(int data)
{
Node *temp = new Node();
temp->data = data;
temp->left = NULL;
temp->right = NULL;
return temp;
}
// A utility function to do inorder traversal of BST
void inorder(Node **root)
{
if (*root != NULL)
{
inorder(&((*root)->left));
printf("%d n", (*root)->data);
inorder(&((*root)->right));
}
}
/* A utility function to insert a new node with given key in BST */
Node* insert(Node** node, int value)
{
if(*node==NULL){
return newNode(value);
}
if((*node)->data > value){
(*node)->left = insert(&((*node)->left),value);
}
else if((*node)->data < value){
(*node)->right = insert(&((*node)->right),value);
}
return *node;
}
// Driver Program to test above functions
int main()
{
/* Let us create following BST
50
/
30 70
/ /
20 40 60 80 */
Node *root = NULL;
root = insert(&root, 50);
insert(&root, 30);
insert(&root, 20);
insert(&root, 40);
insert(&root, 70);
insert(&root, 60);
insert(&root, 80);
// print inoder traversal of the BST
inorder(&root);
return 0;
}
c++ algorithm binary-search
asked 4 mins ago
PulsePulse
101
New contributor
Pulse is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
I have an implementation for my first binary search tree in C++. I was wondering if there was some cleaner way to avoid using the double pointer in the way I have my code setup? Such as on one line I have:
(*node)->left = insert(&((*node)->left),value);
Which seems a bit "messy", but it almost seems necessary for the way I have implemented the BST. Maybe I am possibly missing a way I can change the syntax slightly to achieve the same result? I understand that I can have a double pointer as a parameter for my functions, but I have been told that it is not the standard in C++. I have my code posted below, along with how I am testing it.I am trying to prepare for technical interviews so any feedback is welcome.
#include<stdio.h>
#include<stdlib.h>
#include<iostream>
struct Node
{
int data;
Node *left, *right;
};
// A utility function to create a new BST node
Node* newNode(int data)
{
Node *temp = new Node();
temp->data = data;
temp->left = NULL;
temp->right = NULL;
return temp;
}
// A utility function to do inorder traversal of BST
void inorder(Node **root)
{
if (*root != NULL)
{
inorder(&((*root)->left));
printf("%d n", (*root)->data);
inorder(&((*root)->right));
}
}
/* A utility function to insert a new node with given key in BST */
Node* insert(Node** node, int value)
{
if(*node==NULL){
return newNode(value);
}
if((*node)->data > value){
(*node)->left = insert(&((*node)->left),value);
}
else if((*node)->data < value){
(*node)->right = insert(&((*node)->right),value);
}
return *node;
}
// Driver Program to test above functions
int main()
{
/* Let us create following BST
50
/
30 70
/ /
20 40 60 80 */
Node *root = NULL;
root = insert(&root, 50);
insert(&root, 30);
insert(&root, 20);
insert(&root, 40);
insert(&root, 70);
insert(&root, 60);
insert(&root, 80);
// print inoder traversal of the BST
inorder(&root);
return 0;
}
c++ algorithm binary-search
c++ algorithm binary-search
asked 4 mins ago
PulsePulse
101
New contributor
Pulse is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
asked 4 mins ago
PulsePulse
101
New contributor
Pulse is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
asked 4 mins ago
PulsePulse
101
New contributor
Pulse is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
asked 4 mins ago
PulsePulse
101
asked 4 mins ago
PulsePulse
101
101
New contributor
Pulse is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
New contributor
Pulse is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
Pulse is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |
add a comment |
0
active
oldest
votes
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["\$", "\$"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function () {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function () {
StackExchange.snippets.init();
});
});
}, "code-snippets");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "196"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Pulse is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fcodereview.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f211072%2fcleaner-way-to-handle-double-pointer-in-c-bst%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
0
active
oldest
votes
0
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
Pulse is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Pulse is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Pulse is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Pulse is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Thanks for contributing an answer to Code Review Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.
Please pay close attention to the following guidance:
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fcodereview.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f211072%2fcleaner-way-to-handle-double-pointer-in-c-bst%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
