Is there a way for objects inside an array to detect what slot they are in? If I had a Object array, could a Object inside the array detect what cell it is in without being explicitly told?
Nope, unfortunately, how arrays work in Java is that the array simply "points" to an object. As a Java array only stores references (to objects), but any number of variables can reference the same object, so an Object has no idea where it lives in an array. In fact, the same object can be pointed to from several indices in the array!
Consider
Object o = new Object(); // The variable o has a "reference" to the Object in memory
Object[] arr = new Object[3]; // empty array to hold Object types
arr[0] = o; // the first index points to the Object we created above
arr[1] = o; // the second index points to that same object!
arr[2] = o; // still the same object! If we modified the original object (assuming it's not immutable) in any way, all the indices in this array would point to the modified object.
Hope this helps!
The fastest (easiest to write) way to iterate through an array of objects is
for (Object o : arr) {
// do something to the local variable o, which you can think of as representing each object in your array
}
No. If you need to do this, you probably have a design flaw. Why does an Object need to know where it appears in the array? If the index is of some semantic meaning or interest to the object, then the object should have an int field containing this information. If you are trying to modify the original array based on one object then you probably have a poorly-factored class somewhere, e.g. if something such as this is happening:
class A {
Object data[];
}
class B {
remove(A a, Object instance) {
// how to remove instance from a.data??
}
}
Then really B.remove should be a method of A and hence have access to data in the first place. And so forth.
Furthermore an array may just not be the right data structure. If the index has much semantic value a Map<Integer, Object> may be more appropriate, although arrays are often used to represent this when the indices are continuous from 1..n and the array is immutable. In my silly example with remove, a List would be more appropriate. Etc.
try
int i = Arrays.asList(arr).indexOf(obj);
As #Aaron_H said, no dice. I'll add that you can work around it with something like this:
public class Test {
public static void main(String[] args) {
ZenArray<IndexedString> z = new ZenArray(10);
for (int i = 0; i < z.size(); i++) {
z.set(i, new IndexedString("String " + i));
}
for (int i = 0; i < z.size(); i++) {
System.out.println("I'm at index " + z.get(i).getIndex());
}
}
}
class ZenArray<T extends ZenArray.IndexedElement> {
private Object [] a;
interface IndexedElement {
void setIndex(int i);
int getIndex();
}
public ZenArray(int size) {
a = new Object[size];
}
public void set(int i, T val) {
val.setIndex(i);
a[i] = val;
}
public T get(int i) {
return (T)a[i];
}
public int size() {
return a.length;
}
}
// An example of an indexed element implementation.
class IndexedString implements ZenArray.IndexedElement {
int i;
String val;
public IndexedString(String val) {
this.val = val;
}
public String getVal() {
return val;
}
#Override
public void setIndex(int i) {
this.i = i;
}
#Override
public int getIndex() {
return i;
}
}
Related
I'm not understanding something, obviously. I've got a primitive array of ints, and I need to convert that into an array of my own type. Here's what I've tried.
public class StupidInt {
#JsonProperty("ID")
private int id;
public StupidInt(int id) { this.id = id; }
public int getId() { return this.id; }
}
public static void main(String []args){
int[] ints = {1,2,4,67};
StupidInt[] myInts = IntStream.of(ints).map(StupidInt::new).collect(Collectors.toList());
}
As you might expect, myInts line has a problem and that problem is "cannot convert StupidInt to int". But I'm not sure what combination of map or foreach or whatever intermediate and terminal methods to use to convert that array of ints to an array of my object. What is the correct way to do this conversion?
You need to use mapToObj to create a new Stream of objects and toArray instead of collect to obtain the result as an array.
StupidInt[] myInts = IntStream.of(ints).mapToObj(StupidInt::new).toArray(StupidInt[]::new);
The answer from #hev1 is simple and the best answer for a terminal method for what you are trying to achieve.
I provide here two different options if you need a different solution. The first is just a for intermediate method to create the primitive array; and the second option is a wholesome different approach to the problem and does not create a primitive array but a "list" of the type Object that reflect the primitive type and will also work with any type or object:
Solution 1:
int[] ints = {1,2,4,67};
StupidInt[] myInts = new StupidInt[ints.length];
for (int i = 0; i < myInts.length; i++) {
myInts[i] = new StupidInt(ints[i]);
}
Solution 2:
public class StupidIntList {
private ArrayList<Integer> ids;
public StupidIntList() {
this.ids = new ArrayList<Integer>();
}
public void add(int id) {
this.ids.add(id);
}
public int get(int pos) {
return this.ids.get(pos);
}
public boolean findId(int i_d) {
for (Integer id : ids) {
if(id == i_d)
return true;
}
return false;
}
public String toString() {
String res = "[";
for (Integer id : ids) {
res += id+",";
}
return res.substring(0, res.lastIndexOf(","))+"]";
}
public static void main(String []args){
int[] ints = {1,2,4,67};
StupidIntList myInts = new StupidIntList();
for (int i = 0; i < ints.length; i++) {
myInts.add(ints[i]);
}
System.out.println(myInts);
}
}
In this case to add a new int you use the add method and to get one int you will use the get(position) method or the find method to look if it exists and get the position.
Or you could simply use the ArrayList class or if you want I can share with you a list structure that allows what you need to accomplish, has most methods you can think of, implements comparable, can be ordered, implements iterable and is very efficient.
I am currently doing a online Java course and am having a bit of trouble with a assignment. The assignment is to essentially create a Hashmap using just Arrays but no other Java Data Structures or methods. This is my code:
public class test {
static String[] array = new String[10];
class Cell<T> {
T first;
Cell<T> next;
Cell(T h, Cell<T> t) {
first = h;
next = t;
}
}
public static int hashFunction(String a) {
int sum = 1;
for (int i = 0; i < a.length(); i++) {
char b = a.charAt(i);
int value = (int) b;
sum *= value;
}
return sum % array.length;
}
public static void arraySetter(String a) {
int position = hashFunction(a);
if (array[position] == null) {
array[position] = a;
} else {
//Need a Linked List here for when there is already a item in the array at the same index.
}
}
public static void printArray() {
for (int i = 0; i < array.length; i++) {
System.out.println(array[i]);
}
}
public static void main(String[] args) {
arraySetter("abc");
printArray();
}
}
My code essentially creates a list of lists. At each position in the Array I now need to create a list which is only initialised when there are two items with the same value for the hashFunction. I haven't written that function yet but my problem now is I don't know how to create a linkedList at each position in the array. Can someone help me out here?
This is the data structure in which you should store your data:
Cell[] array
When using an array such as String[] you will never be able to add any else than instances of String into that array.
When you get a new hashCode, you should create a new one:
array[position] = new Cell<>(a, null);
As it is the first element from the linkedList we will call it the head.
Every time a value with the same hashcode is provided, you will need to iterate from the head until a Cell whose next value is null, then you define it with a new instance of Cell.
This is generally called addLast method, and you ca find a good example here:
https://www.cs.cmu.edu/~adamchik/15-121/lectures/Linked%20Lists/linked%20lists.html
If you want a linked list to avoid collision then you have to declare array which will contain head of the linked list.
Node<K,V>[] table;
Sample code not fully implemented.
class Node<K,V> {
K key;
V value;
Node<K,V> next;
}
Node will contain current key and value .if key is same then you have to override and also next value if you want to use linked list.If you want to use array to avoid collision that time also use node which will contain key and value key is required to check equality and no next variable.
I was wondering if anyone would be able to point me in the correct direction in regards to creating my own array list methods. For instance, the current project I am assigned to does not allow for me to use the methods given to me for free like in the following example.
package com.tutorialspoint;
import java.util.ArrayList;
public class ArrayListDemo {
public static void main(String[] args) {
// create an empty array list with an initial capacity
ArrayList<Integer> arrlist = new ArrayList<Integer>(5);
// use add() method to add elements in the list
arrlist.add(15);
arrlist.add(22);
arrlist.add(30);
arrlist.add(40);
// adding element 25 at third position
arrlist.add(2,25);
// let us print all the elements available in list
for (Integer number : arrlist) {
System.out.println("Number = " + number);
}
}
}
This example shows the add() method. For my project I have to create this method myself and call it from a different file within my package.
I find this as an interesting problem. I am always curious about how things work at the raw level.
If you think about it, an ArrayList is basically just an array that you can expand. So you can either have a really big array (which would take a lot of memory for one ArrayList) or every time you add something, you make a new bigger array and copy the contents and add the new item (which I think the performance is O(N)).
This is my attempt without using any libraries:
public class MyArrayList<T>
{
private T[] asArray;
#SuppressWarnings("unchecked")
public MyArrayList()
{
asArray = (T[]) new Object[0];
}
public void add(T t)
{
#SuppressWarnings("unchecked")
T[] temp = (T[]) new Object[asArray.length + 1];
// copy everything over to the new array
for (int i = 0; i < asArray.length; i++)
{
temp[i] = asArray[i];
}
// add the new element
temp[asArray.length] = t;
asArray = temp;
}
public void remove(int index)
{
if (index < 0 || index >= asArray.length) return;
#SuppressWarnings("unchecked")
T[] temp = (T[]) new Object[asArray.length - 1];
boolean found = false;
// copy everything over to the new element
for (int i = 0; i < asArray.length; i++)
{
// don't copy if the indices are the same
if (i == index)
{
found = true;
continue;
}
temp[i - (found ? 1 : 0)] = asArray[i]; // it's i - 1 after the removed object so then it doesn't leave a gap and it doesn't go over the array's length
}
asArray = temp;
}
public T get(int index)
{
return asArray[index];
}
}
I am quite proud of this code. :) I consider Short_Teeth's code cheating because the class is a subclass and, well, doesn't add anything. I hope I helped.
This is very easy to understand; However, I explained a little bit in comments.
public class MyArrayList<E extends Object> {
private static int initialCapacity = 5;
private static int currentSize;
private Object[] myArrayList = {}, temp = {};
private static int currentIndex = 0;
public static void main(String[] args) {
MyArrayList arrList = new MyArrayList();
arrList.add("123"); //add String
arrList.printAllElements();
arrList.add(new Integer(111)); //add Integer
arrList.printAllElements();
arrList.add(new Float("34.56")); //add Integer
arrList.printAllElements();
arrList.delete("123");
arrList.printAllElements();
arrList.delete(123);
arrList.printAllElements();
arrList.delete(123);
arrList.printAllElements();
}
public MyArrayList() { //creates default sized Array of Objects
myArrayList = new Object[initialCapacity]; //generic expression
/* everytime I cross my capacity,
I make double size of Object Array, copy all the elements from past myObject Array Object
*/
}
public MyArrayList(int size) { //creates custom sized Array of Objects
myArrayList = new Object[size];
}
public void add(Object anyObj) {
//add element directy
myArrayList[currentIndex] = anyObj;
currentSize = myArrayList.length;
currentIndex++;
if (currentIndex == currentSize) {
createDoubleSizedObjectArray(currentSize);
}
}
//print all elements
public void printAllElements() {
System.out.println("Displaying list : ");
for (int i = 0; i < currentIndex; i++) {
System.out.println(myArrayList[i].toString());
}
}
private void createDoubleSizedObjectArray(int currentSize) {
temp = myArrayList.clone();
myArrayList = new MyArrayList[2 * currentSize]; //myObject pointer big size data structure
// myObject = temp.clone(); //probably I can do this here as well. Need to check this
System.arraycopy(temp, 0, myArrayList, 0, currentSize);
}
void delete(Object object) {
//if already empty
if (currentIndex == 0) {
System.out.println("Already empty!");
return;
}
//you don't need to delete anything. I can simply override the storage
currentIndex--;
}
}
import java.util.ArrayList;
public class MyArrayList<E> extends ArrayList<E>{
private static final long serialVersionUID = -5164702379587769464L;
public void newMethod(){
// No implementation
}
}
This is a class which extends from ArrayList and a method called newMethod() was added to this class.
Below we are calling this newly created method in your case you must implement the add to this newly created method.
public class Hello {
public static void main(String args[]) {
MyArrayList<Integer> myList = new MyArrayList<Integer>();
// It has the ArrayList add() method as this new class extends from ArrayList (all the ArrayList methods are included)
myList.add(2);
// The newly created method in your case you need to implement the add yourself
myList.newMethod();
}
}
This could also be a good link for what you need.
http://www.java2novice.com/java-interview-programs/arraylist-implementation/
I also recomend that you try to implement and solve your problems first and then ask questions about a specific problem, and only after you done a good research about what may be causing this problem (There are lots of resources out there). If you done some research before you asked this question, I'm pretty sure that you would have been able to solve everything on your own.
Hope you find this information useful. Good luck.
Hello I have implemented this basic program which should sort out the strings that are inserted however it somehow is failing to insert the strings .
For example if I implement :
TestSort t = new TestSort();
t.i("abc");
t.i("aab");
Can anybody see the error and help me fix this error please ?
Thank you
Here is the code :
public class TestSort {
private int length;
String[] data;
public TestSort() {
length = 0;
}
public void i(String value) {
data[length] = value;
setSorted(data);
length++;
}
public void setSorted(String data[]) {
for(int i = data.length-1; i >= 0; i--) {
for(int j = 0; j < i; j++) {
if(data[j].compareTo(data[j + 1]) > -1) {
String temp = data[j];
data[j] = data[j + 1];
data[j + 1] = temp;
}
}
}
for(int i = 0; i < data.length; i++) {
System.out.print(data[i] +" ");
}
}
}
You don't initialize the array data. So it is set null, and accesses with data[i] will get you an NullPointerException. Even if you initialize this field, it will not work, as Arrays in Java have a fixed size, you have to reallocate the Array, if you insert a new value. You should try a List-implementation instead.
So the code should initialize in the constructor:
data = new ArrayList<String>();
and insertion would change to
data.add(value);
you can change your constructor code as (String array max length can be taken as input parameter):
public testsort()
{
data = new String[10];
length = 0;
}
But if you are not sure with the size of array you can use ArrayList.
You are getting exception because you are comparing with data[j+1] that is still null.
first time when you call
t.i("abc");
there is only one reference in data array that is pointing to String literal "abc" and that is at index 0. index 1 is still referring to null.
first String is already sorted so no need to sort that. if you are having more than one string then you should call setSorted() method.
to solve this you can put your condition in loop as:
if((data[j] != null && data[j+1] != null) &&(data[j].compareTo(data[j + 1]) > -1))
A working example but still: use a List and life is much easier :-)
public class Test {
private int length;
private String[] data;
public Test(int arrayLength) {
// INITIALIZE YOU ARRAY --> No NULLPOINTEREXCEPTION!
data = new String[arrayLength];
length = 0;
}
public void i(String value) {
data[length] = value;
length++;
}
public void setSorted() {
for (int j = 0; j < data.length - 1; j++) {
if (data[j].compareTo(data[j + 1]) > -1) {
String temp = data[j];
data[j] = data[j + 1];
data[j + 1] = temp;
}
}
for (String s : data) {
System.out.println(s);
}
}
public static void main(String[] args) {
Test t = new Test(5);
t.i("bbb");
t.i("aaa");
t.i("ccc");
t.i("zzz");
t.i("ddd");
// USE SETSORTED HERE --> else you fill your array with the same elements
t.setSorted();
}
}
The variable 'data' is null since it is nowhere initialized hence giving null pointer exception. Since 'data' is an array and as per the rule whenever an array is defined, it has to be of defined length. for e.g if we consider your case. 'data' can be initialized as :-
String[] data = new String[any numerical value]
the numerical value will be its length i.e. the maximum number of elements it can hold.
Secondly, as per your program statement :-
data[length] = value;
is trying to assign value at data's [length] index which is completely wrong since you haven't defined the length therefore how could you guess the index's value. Therefore your this approaoch is logically wrong.
For such situation i.e. whenever we're unaware about the length of the array, use of ArrayList is suggested. Therefore your program can be re-written by two ways:-
1) Either define the length of the array
String[] data = new String[n];
where n ranges from at least 1 to any positive integer.
2) By using ArrayList
public class Main {
List<String> data;
public Main(){
data = new ArrayList<String>();
}
public static void main(String... q){
Main m = new Main();
m.insertData("abc");
m.insertData("zxy");
m.insertData("aab");
m.insertData("aaa");
m.showData();
}
public void insertData(String str){
data.add(str);
Collections.sort(data);
}
public void showData(){
if(data!=null && !data.isEmpty()){
for(String s : data){
System.out.println(s);
}
}
}
}
output:-
aaa
aab
abc
zxy
Hope this helps.
as Mnementh suggested, the reason for NPE is that you have created the field data of type String[] but you never initialized it.
Other answers have provided every reason on why your code throwing ugly errors; I have just improved your code by replacing your String[] with List<String> so you don't have to worry about the size of your array anymore.
Sorting is also simplified now using Collections.sort().
have a look,
class test1 {
public static void main(String[] args) {
Test sorting = new Test();
sorting.input("abc");
sorting.input("cba");
sorting.input("aab");
sorting.setSorted();
}
}
class Test {
private List<String> data = new ArrayList<String>();
public void input(String value) {data.add(value);}
public void setSorted() {
Collections.sort(data);
for (String current : data) {
System.out.println(current);
}
}
}
if you are using Java 8, then you can use Arrays.parallerSort(), it performs sorting the same way as Collection.sort but with a parallel implementation.
Current sorting implementations provided by the Java Collections Framework > (Collections.sort and Arrays.sort) all perform the
sorting operation sequentially in the calling thread. This enhancement
will offer the same set of sorting operations currently provided by
the Arrays class, but with a parallel implementation that utilizes the
Fork/Join framework. These new API's are still synchronous with regard
to the calling thread as it will not proceed past the sorting
operation until the parallel sort is complete.
to implement it, replace Collections.sort with Arrays.parallelSort in the above code,
Replace,
Collections.sort(data);
with,
Arrays.parallelSort(data.toArray(new String[data.size()]));
I have the following code for displaying the sum of two consecutive element of ArrayList until the element left is one.for example:-
if i entered
1 2 3 4 5
output
3 7 5 //adding the two consecutive last one is as it is
10 5//doing the same thing
15
code
import java.util.*;
import java.lang.Integer;
class Substan{
ArrayList <Integer> list = new ArrayList <Integer> ();
ArrayList <Integer> newList = new ArrayList <Integer> ();// this will be the list containing the next sequence.
int index=0;
int sum=0;
Substan(){
Scanner read = new Scanner(System.in);
String choice;
System.out.println("Enter the elements of the array");
do{
int element = read.nextInt();
list.add(element);
System.out.println("More?");
choice = read.next();
}while(choice.equals("y") || choice.equals("Y"));
}
/* precondition- we have the raw list that user has enterd.
postcondition - we have displayed all the sublists,by adding two consecutives numbers and the last one is having one element.
*/
void sublist(){
while(noofElementsIsNotOneInList()){
index =0;
while(newListIsNotComplete()){
if(nextElementIsThere()){
sum = addTheConsecutive();
}
else{
sum = getLastNumber();
}
storeSumInNewList();
}
displayTheNewList();
System.out.println("");
updateTheLists();
}
displayTheNewList(); //as we have danger of Off By One Bug (OBOB)
System.out.println("");
}
private boolean noofElementsIsNotOneInList(){
boolean isnotone = true;
int size = list.size();
if ( size == 1){
isnotone = false;
}
return isnotone;
}
private boolean newListIsNotComplete(){
boolean isNotComplete = true;
int listSize = list.size();
int newListSize = newList.size();
if (listSizeIsEven()){
if ( newListSize == listSize/2){
isNotComplete = false;
}
}
else{
if( newListSize == (listSize/2) +1){
isNotComplete = false;
}
}
return isNotComplete;
}
private boolean listSizeIsEven(){
if ( list.size()%2 == 0 ){
return true;
}
else{
return false;
}
}
/*
we are at some index.
returns true if we have an element at (index+1) index.
*/
private boolean nextElementIsThere(){
if ( list.size() == index+1 ){
return false;
}
else{
return true;
}
}
/* precondition-we are at index i
postcondition - we will be at index i+2 and we return sum of elements at index i and i+1.
*/
private int addTheConsecutive(){
int sum = list.get(index)+list.get(index+1);
index += 2;
return sum;
}
/* we are at last element and we have to return that element.
*/
private int getLastNumber(){
return list.get(index);
}
private void storeSumInNewList(){
newList.add(sum);
}
private void displayTheNewList(){
int size = newList.size();
for ( int i=0;i<size;i++){
System.out.print(newList.get(i)+" ");
}
}
/*precondition - we have processed all the elements in the list and added the result in newList.
postcondition - Now my list will be the newList,as we are processing in terms of list and newList reference will have a new object.
*/
private void updateTheLists(){
list = newList;
newList = new ArrayList <Integer>();// changing the newList
}
public static void main(String[] args) {
Substan s = new Substan();
s.sublist();
}
}
So i have done a lot of refinement of my code but having a problem of sharing the local variables with the other methods.for example i have used index instance for storing the index and initially i thought that i will put this as not an instance but a local variable in method sublist() but as it cannot be viewed from other methods which needed to use the index like addTheConsecutive().So considering that i put the index at class level.So is it wright approach that put the variables that are shared at class level rather than looking at only the state of the object initially before coding and stick to that and never change it?
Consider this:
An object can communicate with other(s) only by sharing its attributes. So, if you need an object to read the state of another, the only way it can be done is by giving it "permission" to read the other object attributes.
You have two ways to do that:
Declaring the object attributes public, or
Creating getXXX() methods (makes sense for private attributes)
I personally prefer option two, because the getXXX() method returns the value ("state") of a particular attribute without the risk of being modified. Of course, if you need to modify a private attribute, you should also write a setXXX() method.
Example:
public class MyClass {
private int foo;
private String bar;
/*
* Code
*/
public int getFoo() {
return foo;
}
public String getBar() {
return bar;
}
public void setFoo(int foo) {
this.foo = foo;
}
public void setBar(String bar) {
this.bar = bar;
}
/*
* More code
*/
}
This way all the object attributes are encapsulated, and:
they cannot be read by any other object, unless you specifically call the appropriate getXXX() function, and
cannot be altered by other objects, unless you specifically call the appropriate setXXX() function.
Compare it with the non-abstracted version.
for (int index = 0; index < list.size(); index += 2) {
int sum = list.get(index);
if (index + 1 < list.size() {
sum += list.get(index + 1);
}
newList.add(sum);
}
Now, top-down refining the algorithm using names is a sound methodology, which helps in further creative programming.
As can seen, when abstracting the above again:
while (stillNumbersToProcess()) {
int sum = sumUpto2Numbers();
storeSumInNewList(sum);
}
One may keep many variables like sum as local variables, simplifying state.
One kind of helpful abstraction is the usage of conditions, in a more immediate form:
private boolean listSizeIsEven() {
return list.size() % 2 == 0;
}
private boolean nextElementIsThere() {
return index + 1 < list.size();
}
There's no point in declaring index at Class level since you dont want it to be a member or an instance of that class. Instead make it local to the method and pass it to other methods as argument where you want to access it.
I think you are asking the wrong question.
Your class variables make very little sense, as do many of the methods. This is mostly because:
Your class is doing too much
Your algorithm is a little odd
The class variables that you do have make much more sense passed as method parameters. Some methods need to see them, and some don't.
Your class is also a little odd, in that calling subList twice on the same class will not produce the same answer.
The code is littered with methods I don't quite see the point in, such as:
private boolean noofElementsIsNotOneInList(){
boolean isnotone = true;
int size = list.size();
if ( size == 1){
isnotone = false;
}
return isnotone;
}
Shouldn't this be:
private boolean noofElementsIsNotOneInList(){
return list.size() == 1;
}
And it makes no sense for it to use some arbitrary List, pass one in so that you know which List you are checking:
private boolean noofElementsIsNotOneInList(final Collection<?> toCheck){
return toCheck.size() == 1;
}
The same logic can be applied to almost all of your methods.
This will remove the instance variables and make your code much more readable.
TL;DR: Using lots of short appropriately named methods: good. Having those methods do things that one wouldn't expect: bad. Having lots of redundant code that makes things very hard to read: bad.
In fact, just to prove a point, the whole class (apart from the logic to read from stdin, which shouldn't be there anyway) can transformed into one short, recursive, method that requires no instance variables at all:
public static int sumPairs(final List<Integer> list) {
if (list.size() == 1)
return list.get(0);
final List<Integer> compacted = new LinkedList<>();
final Iterator<Integer> iter = list.iterator();
while (iter.hasNext()) {
final int first = iter.next();
if (iter.hasNext()) compacted.add(first + iter.next());
else compacted.add(first);
}
return sumPairs(compacted);
}
Now you could break this method apart into several appropriately named shorter methods, and that would make sense. It's sometimes more helpful to start from the other end. Sketch out the logic of your code and what it's trying to do, then find meaningful fragments to split it into. Possibly after adding unit tests to verify behaviour.
what about doing by Recursion:
public int calculateSum(List<Integer> nums) {
displayList(nums);
if (nums.size() == 1) {
return nums.get(0);
}
List<Integer> interim = new ArrayList<Integer>();
for (int i = 0; i < nums.size(); i = i + 2) {
if (i + 1 < nums.size()) {
interim.add(nums.get(i) + nums.get(i + 1));
} else {
interim.add(nums.get(i));
}
}
return calculateSum(interim);
}
public static void displayList(List<Integer> nums){
System.out.println(nums);
}
Steps:
Run calculate sum until list has 1 element
if list has more than 1 element:
iterate the list by step +2 and sum the element and put into a new List
again call calculate sum