• mcmodknower@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    9 months ago

    you can even have a case where you return the first element of the list if the list is not empty, and it will still be O(1).

    • murtaza64@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      9 months ago

      you can make it sort the first k elements and it will still be O(1). Set k high enough and it might even be useful

      • xmunk@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        9 months ago

        I set k to 50,000,000,000… that’s more items than my shitty computer can fit in memory (including swsp) but I am now happy to celebrate my O(1) algorithm.

      • KubeRoot@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        By that logic, any sorting implementation is O(1), as the indexing variable/address type has limited size