We help IT Professionals succeed at work.

Iterative function

ricco
ricco asked
on
Medium Priority
1,274 Views
Last Modified: 2008-03-10
I am trying to figure out an exercise out that tries to take a copy
function(below) and make it into an iterative function of postorder traversal
that does not have any recursion. I think using a stack is appropriate
isn't it? Any ideas?

typedef struct node *tree_pointer;
typedef struct node
{
int data;
tree_pointer left_child, right child;
};

tree_pointer copy (tree_pointer original)
/*this function returns a tree_pointer to an exact copy of the original
tree*/
{
    tree_pointer temp;
    if(original)
{
    temp=(tree_pointer)malloc(sizeof(node));
    if (IS_FULL(temp))   /*IS_FULL is a macro*/
   { fprintf(stderr, "the memory is full\n");
     exit(1);
   }
  temp->left_child = copy(original->left_child);
  temp->right_child=copy(original->right_child);
  temp->data=original->data;
  return temp
 }
return NULL;
}
Comment
Watch Question

ozo
CERTIFIED EXPERT
Most Valuable Expert 2014
Top Expert 2015

Commented:
I think using a stack is very appropriate.
(But if you don't want to use the program stack, it may be convenient
to use the tree itself as a stack by adding a parent pointer)

Commented:
I agree with ozo.  for doing a tree, a stack is a good idea. though  I would say recursion would be faster and less code.
ozo
CERTIFIED EXPERT
Most Valuable Expert 2014
Top Expert 2015

Commented:
(since recursion naturally comes with a very nice automatic stack)
Commented:
If you use a stack, are you not going to end up with a program that looks really close to this recursive program, but you will handle the recursion yourself? Will this satisfy the assignment?
You walk down the tree and at every branch you push the reference to that branch onto a local stack, then, when you can't go down any more, you pop it off the stack and proceed with the right branch. I am not sure that I see the advantage of this algorithm over the recursive one iin your example.

I am thinking that you are going to want to do a tree walk and create a tree that has backwards links on it as you go. This would make it so that you would not use the stack (which is really just another way of implementing recursion.) It would be a bit more of a memory hog during the copy, but it would be a completly different mechanism.

Not the solution you were looking for? Getting a personalized solution is easy.

Ask the Experts
Access more of Experts Exchange with a free account
Thanks for using Experts Exchange.

Create a free account to continue.

Limited access with a free account allows you to:

  • View three pieces of content (articles, solutions, posts, and videos)
  • Ask the experts questions (counted toward content limit)
  • Customize your dashboard and profile

*This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

OR

Please enter a first name

Please enter a last name

8+ characters (letters, numbers, and a symbol)

By clicking, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.