Best case: 2
Worst case: 3
Average: 2+2/3
On average I think it is 12 credits needed for a 3 year college.
Both bubble sort and selection sort are in-place sorts, which means they require no additional space to sort. Both are O(n). Both also share worst/average case time complexities of O(n2). Selection sort also has O(n2) for a best case scenario, while an intelligent bubble sort implementation will have O(n) for a best case (already sorted) scenario. Note that while looking at the numbers above seem to show that bubble sort has a slight edge over selection sort, in practice you should choose selection over bubble. It will very nearly always perform better in real-time tests.
Two or more numbers are needed to find the average then you add them up then divide them by how many there are as for example the average of 2+4+6 = 12 and so 12/3 = 4 which is the mean average
Homo habilis is estimated to have had an average height of around 4 feet 3 inches (130 cm) and an average weight of about 77 pounds (35 kg). These estimates are based on fossil evidence and comparisons with modern human relatives.
To find the 4th number needed to achieve an average of 80, first calculate the total sum of the current 3 numbers, which is (3 \times 78 = 234). For an average of 80 with 4 numbers, the total sum must be (4 \times 80 = 320). Therefore, the 4th number can be found by subtracting the sum of the first 3 numbers from the desired total: (320 - 234 = 86). Thus, the 4th number needed is 86.
A minimum of 3 months is needed but can be up to 30 months. The longer it is aged the "sharper" it becomes.
it is sort of different for all fishes .for example a sperm whale breaths 3-4 times per minute
If you're only sorting 3 elements, it should take you 0 to 2 iterations. Of course, this answer might change if you're trying test out a scalable sorting algorithm.
void sort (int& a, int& b, int& c) { if (a>b) std::swap (a, b); if (b>c) std::swap (b, c); else return; if (a>b) std::swap (a, b); } Note that this is based upon a bubble sort algorithm. Although usually inefficient as a general sorting algorithm, given that we know there are only three elements means we can implement it reasonably efficiently without any additional space complexity. There will always be 2 or 3 comparisons but at most there will be 3 swaps. The only improvement we could really make is to implement a type of selection sort: void sort (int& a, int& b, int& c) { if (a>b && a>c) std::swap (a, c); else if (b>c) std::swap (b, c); if (a>b) std::swap (a, b); } Here we either make 3 or 4 comparisons but only 2 swaps at most. The assumption here is that a comparison is a quicker operation than a swap thus the selection sort method is more efficient. However, unless you were to sort millions of sets of three one after the other, you are unlikely to see any measurable difference in performance.
Comparisons of Adjective: 1.Positive 2Comparative 3.Superlative
3
3