if (this->next) this->next->prev= this->prev;
else list->last= this->prev;
if (this->prev) this->prev->next= this->next;
else list->first= this->next;
free (this);
I'm sorry brother
Add another pointer to the nodes for the previous node: struct node { struct node *next; struct node *previous; void *data; }; typedef struct node node; Then change the logic for insertion and removal to make sure you set the previous pointer as well as the next one.
You'll need to use a doubly-linked circular list, since otherwise when you pop off the tail element you'll need to whizz all the way round the list to find its predecessor. See the links section for an implementation of a doubly-linked circular list.
Add weights to the elements of the queue and use an algorithm to sort the queue every time an element is added.
To implement a queue using stacks efficiently, you can use two stacks. One stack is used for enqueueing elements, and the other stack is used for dequeueing elements. When dequeueing, if the dequeue stack is empty, you can transfer elements from the enqueue stack to the dequeue stack to maintain the order of elements. This approach allows for efficient implementation of a queue using stacks.
Yes it is possible to implement stack and queue using linked list
store the exor of the previous node address and next node address in each node of single linked list .further exor the nodes to proceed forward or backward as necessary
If you are using the doubly-linked list from the STL library, then the function call:name_of_list.push_back();should delete the last element.
Advantages of single linked list: # Decrease in storage space per linked list node # Simpler implementation Advantages of double linked list # Decrease in work when accessing a random node # Decrease in work when inserting or deleting a node
To implement a merge sort algorithm for a doubly linked list in Java, you can follow these steps: Divide the doubly linked list into two halves. Recursively sort each half using merge sort. Merge the two sorted halves back together in sorted order. You can achieve this by creating a mergeSort() method that takes the doubly linked list as input and recursively divides and merges the list. Make sure to handle the merging process for doubly linked lists by adjusting the pointers accordingly. Here is a basic outline of how you can implement this algorithm in Java: java public class MergeSortDoublyLinkedList public Node mergeSort(Node head) if (head null head.next null) return head; Node middle getMiddle(head); Node nextOfMiddle middle.next; middle.next null; Node left mergeSort(head); Node right mergeSort(nextOfMiddle); return merge(left, right); private Node merge(Node left, Node right) if (left null) return right; if (right null) return left; Node result null; if (left.data right.data) result left; result.next merge(left.next, right); result.next.prev result; else result right; result.next merge(left, right.next); result.next.prev result; return result; private Node getMiddle(Node head) if (head null) return head; Node slow head; Node fast head; while (fast.next ! null fast.next.next ! null) slow slow.next; fast fast.next.next; return slow; class Node int data; Node prev; Node next; public Node(int data) this.data data; This code snippet provides a basic implementation of the merge sort algorithm for a doubly linked list in Java. You can further customize and optimize it based on your specific requirements.
A singly linked list is a linked list which only provides links in "one direction". Using a metaphor, a singly linked list is a one way street, while a doubly linked list is a two way street. Once you move forward in a singly linked list, there is no way to go backwards unless you kept your reference/pointer from before. A singly linked list would look like this: start ----> node1---->node2---->node3 ----> NULL You will see that node2 only has a link forward to node3 - it does not have a link backwards to node1, even though node1 has a link forwards to node2. To prevent us from permanently losing access to portions of the linked list, we generally keep a reference/pointer to "start". A doubly linked list would have twice the number of pointers/references as a singly linked list - making it very inefficient to store small datatypes. On the other hand, it would be possible to move both forwards and backwards with a doubly linked list because you have links pointing both forwards and backwards.
Doubly unlikely.