LeetCode 238. Product of Array Except Self (Solution Explained)

Поделиться
HTML-код
  • Опубликовано: 20 сен 2019
  • The Best Place To Learn Anything Coding Related - bit.ly/3MFZLIZ
    Join my free exclusive community built to empower programmers! - www.skool.com/software-develo...
    Preparing For Your Coding Interviews? Use These Resources
    --------------------
    (My Course) Data Structures & Algorithms for Coding Interviews - thedailybyte.dev/courses/nick
    AlgoCademy - algocademy.com/?referral=nick...
    Daily Coding Interview Questions - bit.ly/3xw1Sqz
    10% Off Of The Best Web Hosting! - hostinger.com/nickwhite
    Follow My Twitter - / nicholaswwhite
    Follow My Instagram - / nickwwhite
    Other Social Media
    ----------------------------------------------
    Discord - / discord
    Twitch - / nickwhitettv
    TikTok - / nickwhitetiktok
    LinkedIn - / nicholas-w-white
    Show Support
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Patreon - / nick_white
    PayPal - paypal.me/nickwwhite?locale.x...
    Become A Member - / @nickwhite
    #coding #programming #softwareengineering
  • НаукаНаука

Комментарии • 124

  • @jelliott1458
    @jelliott1458 4 года назад +103

    How the hell are you supposed to figure this out without knowing the “ah-ha” trick?

    • @leomonz
      @leomonz 3 года назад +10

      It is more like math. Have to exercise more look at more problems and solutions. SO that is right coding interview is not easy. a lot trick questions

    • @shrimatkapoor2200
      @shrimatkapoor2200 3 года назад +4

      Do loads of problems, your brain will start thinking like that

    • @SakshamArmstrong123
      @SakshamArmstrong123 3 года назад +12

      @@shrimatkapoor2200 that's still like learning all the "ah-ha" tricks until you have learnt sufficiently enough to solve the current scope of problems. It essentially isn't "thinking like that" but "applying like that".

    • @Hyperian
      @Hyperian 3 года назад +17

      i hate that the answer is just 'practice more' on basically math puzzles, but it's the least worst answer.

    • @miramar-103
      @miramar-103 3 года назад +8

      likely you will not - and is why this style of tech interview is so fundamentally broken ...

  • @edwardnewgate2198
    @edwardnewgate2198 4 года назад +34

    Hey thanks for mentioning the difficulty in the thumbnail itself- keep up the great work!

  • @RakaChowdhuryUK
    @RakaChowdhuryUK 8 месяцев назад +3

    Whenever I need to find a solution to any Leetcode problem I look into your channel first. None other explains like you do! Claps claps 👏👏

  • @grootz2820
    @grootz2820 4 года назад +23

    Thanks a lot! The transition from 2 arrays to 1 becomes really intuitive.

  • @BrentSnider
    @BrentSnider 4 года назад +10

    Great video! Love that you solved it first with the extra space and then simplified, much easier to follow.

  • @louismontes6632
    @louismontes6632 2 года назад +6

    This was a really excellent explanation. I went through it a couple times but the code was just intuitive after the explanation! Your videos really help a lot man. Thanks!

  • @fcsie
    @fcsie 3 года назад +1

    ive watched several videos of this problem and yours has the best explanation by far. Thanks!

  • @nullnull8685
    @nullnull8685 4 года назад +1

    Thank you for the first solution! Made SO much more sense than the leetcode answers..

  • @shadowthehedgehog2727
    @shadowthehedgehog2727 2 года назад

    I just solved this today, but wow you really made it click for me when you said pretty much everything to the left of x times everything to the right of x. NOW it makes sense. Thank you Nick.

  • @Sandboxcode
    @Sandboxcode 3 года назад +4

    Really loved this explanation. Thanks. Man what a bummer, leetcode's Solution is locked unless you're Premium atm. Good thing this video is out there

  • @suharajsalim4549
    @suharajsalim4549 3 года назад +2

    I am seriously addicted to his videos!

  • @svdfxd
    @svdfxd 4 года назад +8

    As usual, great explanation.

  • @kickhuggy
    @kickhuggy 3 года назад +22

    I get it, but I don't get how you're supposed to figure this out in a 30 min interview and I've done a few of these. I don't think the person who came up with this problem did it in 30 mins, do they just expect people to have done all these problems before?

    • @sherlockstark1706
      @sherlockstark1706 2 года назад

      Possibly, they would give the hint but, I think they want you to think in the direction for saving space rather than knowing the trick to solve it. I can't speak for every recruiter though XD

    • @AlFredo-sx2yy
      @AlFredo-sx2yy Год назад +2

      you're not supposed to figure this out in 30 mins. The people who came up with this algorithm were computer scientists that did it over years of research papers and improving each other's work. Just as any interview question, this once was a recently created algorithm, which eventually became common knowledge and now interviewers expect you to know all of this stuff as if we were all 69 thousand times smarter than the people that came up with these algorithms.

    • @kickhuggy
      @kickhuggy Год назад

      Quick update, right after this post I ended up getting lucky and joining fang lol. Extra emphasis on LUCKY

    • @AlFredo-sx2yy
      @AlFredo-sx2yy Год назад

      @@kickhuggy you think working for fang is being "lucky"?

    • @kickhuggy
      @kickhuggy Год назад +1

      @@AlFredo-sx2yy i meant I got lucky on the interview, but yeah I get paid half a mil to work remote, doing what I love and traveling. Could be worse

  • @omgharajuku
    @omgharajuku 5 месяцев назад

    Thank you! I was always confused about this problem but now I get it

  • @leezhenjian7451
    @leezhenjian7451 5 месяцев назад

    Thanks nick. as a beginner this question really fried me. it is nice to have a clean explanation.

  • @lilyh4573
    @lilyh4573 2 года назад +2

    Thanks Nick! Boy I did hate this question

  • @samandarboymurodov8941
    @samandarboymurodov8941 Год назад

    Thank you, Nick. It is a great explanation!

  • @tharunprabakaran
    @tharunprabakaran 4 года назад +4

    You are awesome, Thanks alot !

  • @kaiserkonok
    @kaiserkonok Год назад

    Awesome Explanation. Thank you so much🔥

  • @robinlam5038
    @robinlam5038 3 месяца назад

    This example is so good and clear!!

  • @jocavuleta
    @jocavuleta 4 года назад

    Great explanation, appreciate it!

  • @ploratran
    @ploratran 3 года назад

    very well explained. Thank you!

  • @aakritirastogi1660
    @aakritirastogi1660 4 года назад

    The second solution blew my mind! Loved it. Thanks!

  • @abhishekpolicepatil2829
    @abhishekpolicepatil2829 4 года назад

    Beautiful explanation!

  • @gamesandstuff4188
    @gamesandstuff4188 Год назад

    We need more guys like you

  • @calp8395
    @calp8395 2 года назад

    Great explanation on the solution but I was looking for why the product from both directions equals the result we are after.

  • @arthurmastropietro5261
    @arthurmastropietro5261 10 месяцев назад

    great video! i have a question: you said that would be very easy to do this using division. Ok, for the first case [1,2,3,4] it works. But for the second case [-1,1,0,-3,3] how would you solve this using the division method?

  • @ezekieledak
    @ezekieledak 3 года назад

    How long does it take you to understand this problem and how many practices to grasp it well ? also as of now can you still do this in under 30mins?

  • @rebechkah
    @rebechkah Год назад +1

    This was the interview question i had for the amazon internship

  • @ByteMock
    @ByteMock 4 года назад

    Great idea for a question, we will ask this one soon!

  • @vivekgr3001
    @vivekgr3001 4 года назад

    very nice explanation:)

  • @mysterygirl191
    @mysterygirl191 3 года назад

    amazing explanation

  • @huansir1922
    @huansir1922 2 года назад

    easy to understand , thanks

  • @bisujin1685
    @bisujin1685 4 года назад +3

    thumbs up before watching the video

  • @shubhamtiwari6660
    @shubhamtiwari6660 4 года назад

    Clean solution dude.
    Thanks!!!!

    • @SYD_Technologies
      @SYD_Technologies 4 года назад

      Please can u tell me why he declared
      int[ ] array _name= new int[ ];
      What is the use of new and declaration of it

    • @verushannaidoo9450
      @verushannaidoo9450 3 года назад

      @@SYD_Technologies It declares the array on the heap. You can google about dynamic allocation vs static allocation

  • @NickKravitz
    @NickKravitz 4 года назад +2

    I got this problem as a take home interview. One detail you didn't mention is checking for zeros. Once you hit a zero, that's the only element that needs to be calculated. Once you hit two zeros the problem is over and you return all zeros.

    • @solaimanjawad5015
      @solaimanjawad5015 4 года назад +1

      Why would you need to 'check' for zeroes? Zeroes automatically sort themselves out given you're doing the multiplication right.

    • @JM_utube
      @JM_utube 4 года назад +1

      @@solaimanjawad5015 it's a little optimization

  • @monkeytrollhunter
    @monkeytrollhunter 4 года назад +1

    I can think of a bruteforce way but this would be n^2 which would be stupid. Thank you

  • @shrirambalaji2109
    @shrirambalaji2109 2 года назад

    thank you Nick

  • @mr.plua123
    @mr.plua123 7 месяцев назад

    is there a textbook you might recommend for someone wanting to improve their understanding of Data Structures and Algorithms?

  • @yuvrajdarekar3494
    @yuvrajdarekar3494 3 года назад +1

    Thanks man🤩

  • @thedanglingpointer8411
    @thedanglingpointer8411 4 года назад +2

    Great video.
    I have a query - if we haven't seen such category of problem what is the likelihood of coming up with the most optimal solution in 30-35 mins.
    I have solved around 70-80 problems in leetcode, and occasionally there are such questions which stump me. Now I have seen this, so a variety of this should be easy!
    Does this mean we have to solve a huge numbers of problem, and hope that the problems asked at FAANG interview is a variety of what I have seen before ?

  • @Karthik__S_554
    @Karthik__S_554 11 месяцев назад

    excellent!!!
    thank u bruh

  • @sehajpreetsingh4177
    @sehajpreetsingh4177 2 года назад

    That is a clever solution.

  • @ritesh4165
    @ritesh4165 4 года назад +1

    u rock man!

  • @ZEE-fs6hv
    @ZEE-fs6hv 4 года назад

    thanks man more problems

  • @chaoschao9432
    @chaoschao9432 4 года назад +1

    thanks, great job!

  • @skumakerguitar8708
    @skumakerguitar8708 2 года назад

    what space complexity for this ?

  • @GrassLover9
    @GrassLover9 3 месяца назад

    good explanation

  • @t.saisrujan9456
    @t.saisrujan9456 2 года назад

    thanks man

  • @bldbld18
    @bldbld18 3 года назад +4

    No division - oh sure obviously just get right and left product arrays, multiply them and that's it, so easy and intuitive.
    How the f*ck to come up to that during the interview, there is no any math as well as intuition around wtf...

  • @rishabhrajpathak8347
    @rishabhrajpathak8347 2 года назад

    2:20 also if the array contains 0 then it will give error, as you cannot divide a number by 0.
    Am i right????

  • @lifeofme3172
    @lifeofme3172 3 года назад

    Solving the space complexity was a bit hard. But we'll explained

  • @parambharti7095
    @parambharti7095 3 года назад

    Awesome.

  • @justworkfine321
    @justworkfine321 3 года назад +2

    what time complexity is when it done with division?

    • @sherlockstark1706
      @sherlockstark1706 2 года назад +1

      I think - 2n i.e. O(n) you loop once to find the entire product and then you loop again to find individual answer by dividing itself from entire product

    • @AlFredo-sx2yy
      @AlFredo-sx2yy Год назад +2

      division is slightly slower than multiplication on the processor, but that doesnt really matter. The main reason they hint you not to divide is because of the number 0. Just think about this: What is something divided by 0?

  • @lovipilowu9766
    @lovipilowu9766 7 месяцев назад

    I feel like I would never come to this conclusion on my own despite being a programmer :(

  • @cybersecurity2812
    @cybersecurity2812 2 года назад

    Here is another solution I put together quick, same output, no division and uses the *= operator
    public class Demo {
    public static void main(String[] args) {
    int products[] = {1, 2, 3, 4};
    int total[] = new int[4];
    int ct = products.length;
    for (int i = 0; i < 4; i++) {
    int r = 1;
    for (int x = 0; x < ct; x++) {
    if (x != i) {
    r *= products[x];
    }
    }
    total[i] = r; }
    for (int t = 0; t < 4; t++) {
    System.out.println(total[t]);
    }
    }
    }

  • @Kidkromechan
    @Kidkromechan Год назад

    Wow, who would think about reversing the damn array and creating another array for it then multiplying it together to get the answer hahahahaha
    Genius stuff here but good to see that this kind of problem can be tackled this way.

  • @harshitha3867
    @harshitha3867 3 года назад

    Awesome

  • @uanbu6539
    @uanbu6539 Год назад

    So there's 3 loops in this solution, albeit not nested loops. Why is it that this will be faster than just having a double for-loop? I know there will be an activation record for each inner for loop iteration but the double forloop solution processes less numbers than this 3 loop solution.

    • @yassirsoukaki4111
      @yassirsoukaki4111 Год назад +1

      nested for loop has a time complexity of n^2 but if the are not nested then it is 2n which is O(n)

    • @uanbu6539
      @uanbu6539 Год назад

      @@yassirsoukaki4111 thanks I understood it after a while

  • @zarinb2278
    @zarinb2278 3 года назад

    Hey Nick, love your videos, thanks for them!!! Just one question though, isn't your first solution O(n^2) time complexity?

    • @dennisllopis2478
      @dennisllopis2478 3 года назад +5

      The time complexity is linear. The for loops are not nested and multiple for loops doesn't make it O(n^2). If the test cases were very large than you might see an issue on performance. In this case: O(3n) or O(n + n + n) for the 3 loops is just O(n).

    • @zarinb2278
      @zarinb2278 3 года назад +1

      @@dennisllopis2478 thanks for the response! That makes a ton of sense!!

  • @The2Coolest2
    @The2Coolest2 2 года назад

    Had a solution but it fails the last test cause takes too long. :(

  • @Hyperian
    @Hyperian 3 года назад +2

    still don't get how that works after the explanation lol

  • @codeelsewhere1688
    @codeelsewhere1688 4 года назад

    how about
    let ans = log(sum of all expect current num) - log (current num)
    return antilog(ans)

    • @RHCPhooligan
      @RHCPhooligan 3 года назад

      That is just division with more steps dude...... log(x) - log(y) = log(x/y)... also doesn't work with zeroes

    • @juanmoscoso9573
      @juanmoscoso9573 3 года назад

      @@RHCPhooligan there are no zeros

    • @RHCPhooligan
      @RHCPhooligan 3 года назад

      @@juanmoscoso9573 you’re right but that shows how stupid these problems are. What kind of real world matrix problem exists where there are no zeros ?

    • @juanmoscoso9573
      @juanmoscoso9573 3 года назад

      @@RHCPhooligan they are testing your problem solving

  • @hali1989
    @hali1989 4 года назад +4

    why is this O(n)?
    there are multiple loops (one foroward and one backward), even though they are not nested.
    If multiple not-nested loops are stil O(n), then why is this solution better than looping N times and generating the product?

    • @NickWhite
      @NickWhite  4 года назад +5

      nested loops are N^2 and separate loops are O(N) watch the video I made on time complexity in my technical interview study guide playlist

    • @hali1989
      @hali1989 4 года назад

      Nick White I know that. But if seperated loops are O(n) then what is the difference between looping twice back and forth and looping N times for each index?

    • @NickWhite
      @NickWhite  4 года назад +3

      Watch the video I just told you to watch

    • @hali1989
      @hali1989 4 года назад

      Nick White I watched it. There is no answer there for what is the difference between N for loops and 2 for loops regarding their running time. If there is no difference then whay the back and forth loop solution is better than just looping for each element?

    • @grunze
      @grunze 4 года назад +6

      @@hali1989 Doing left right you get 2n ~ n. Looping n times for each index is n^2. It looks small in this size of array. Hence it could be fine but as the array grows its evident its going to be bad. Remember, however big the constant is it does not matter much. it could be 2*n or 100*n, it would still be O(n) in terms of time complexity.

  • @fahimemroz9141
    @fahimemroz9141 4 года назад +1

    My solution but with JS
    function productExceptSelf(nums) {
    const output = [];
    for (num of nums) output.push(
    output.filter(number => number !== num)
    .reduce((a, v) => a * v)
    );
    return output;
    }

  • @justworkfine321
    @justworkfine321 3 года назад

    can you explain in awwapp?

  • @minciNashu
    @minciNashu 2 года назад

    So what happens when you get asked this question and you already know the answer?

    • @AlFredo-sx2yy
      @AlFredo-sx2yy Год назад

      you act like you're coming up with the solution like a genius. Propose the naive nested loops approach, and say "but that would be too slow as it would be O(N^2)" and then propose whichever solution you think you'll have enough time to code.

    • @minciNashu
      @minciNashu Год назад

      @@AlFredo-sx2yy right.. but there's no 'whichever' solution, because this solution remains ingrained in my head; I see this problem and automatically I know, do a forward loop and then a reversed loop. Some of these problems have a cookie cutter answer and it would be awkward to dance around it.

    • @AlFredo-sx2yy
      @AlFredo-sx2yy Год назад

      @@minciNashu with "whichever solution you prefer" i meant either of the 2 approaches shown in this video: either use the 2 arrays approach or the single array and auxiliary variable approach.
      I did not mean you should create some sort of invented answer...
      You can work for as long as you want and invent a new answer but that makes no sense, if you already know the best answer that was engineered over years by people before you then why try to make one up on the spot? your job is on the line so...

  • @PumpkinEatSpice
    @PumpkinEatSpice 6 дней назад

    Bro this question was such bullshit. I spent so much time trying to figure out how to ONLY use `nums` to store the intermediate result............ and now we are just saying that creating just 1 extra array doesn't count as extra space. wow.

  • @saeedentezari3776
    @saeedentezari3776 4 года назад

    Python:
    array = [1, 2, 3, 4]
    productOfAll = functools.reduce(lambda prod, i: prod * i, array)
    output = list(map(lambda i: productOfAll / i, array))

    • @omarathon5922
      @omarathon5922 4 года назад +1

      Uses division.

    • @saeedentezari3776
      @saeedentezari3776 4 года назад

      @@omarathon5922 Did the question mention not to use division?

    • @ashishkhuraishy
      @ashishkhuraishy 4 года назад +1

      Its says in the note

    • @Yeager098
      @Yeager098 4 года назад

      won't work if we have 0's in the list

    • @cybersecurity2812
      @cybersecurity2812 2 года назад

      Python without division
      products = [1,2,3,4]
      box = []
      for i, v in enumerate(products):
      r = 1
      for y in range(len(products)):
      if (y != i):
      r *= products[y]
      box.append(r)
      for i in box:
      print(i)

  • @__-kd8oz
    @__-kd8oz 3 года назад

    cant use division?
    *uses negative number exponent*
    surprised Pikachu face.