Skip to content

feat: Implemented Morris Inorder traversal for Binary tree #11774

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom
Closed
wants to merge 4 commits into from
Closed

feat: Implemented Morris Inorder traversal for Binary tree #11774

wants to merge 4 commits into from

Conversation

kuntal0901
Copy link

Describe your change:

  • Add an algorithm?
  • Fix a bug or typo in an existing algorithm?
  • Add or change doctests? -- Note: Please avoid changing both code and tests in a single pull request.
  • Documentation change?

Checklist:

  • I have read CONTRIBUTING.md.
  • This pull request is all my own work -- I have not plagiarized.
  • I know that pull requests will not be merged if they fail the automated tests.
  • This PR only changes one algorithm file. To ease review, please open separate PRs for separate algorithms.
  • All new Python files are placed inside an existing directory.
  • All filenames are in all lowercase characters with no spaces or dashes.
  • All functions and variable names follow Python naming conventions.
  • All function parameters and return values are annotated with Python type hints.
  • All functions have doctests that pass the automated testing.
  • All new algorithms include at least one URL that points to Wikipedia or another similar explanation.
  • If this pull request resolves one or more open issues then the description above includes the issue number(s) with a closing keyword: "Fixes #ISSUE-NUMBER".

@algorithms-keeper algorithms-keeper bot added the awaiting reviews This PR is ready to be reviewed label Oct 5, 2024
tianyizheng02
tianyizheng02 requested changes Oct 5, 2024
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@tianyizheng02 tianyizheng02 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Some minor nitpicks, but otherwise LGTM

data_structures/binary_tree/morris_inorder_traversal.py Outdated
Comment on lines 15 to 20
value : int
The value stored at the node.
left : TreeNode
Pointer to the left child node (default is None).
right : TreeNode
Pointer to the right child node (default is None).
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Suggested change
value : int
The value stored at the node.
left : TreeNode
Pointer to the left child node (default is None).
right : TreeNode
Pointer to the right child node (default is None).
value: The value stored at the node.
left: Pointer to the left child node (default is None).
right: Pointer to the right child node (default is None).

By convention in this repo, we prefer not to include the types of the function params in the docstrings. This is because the functions themselves should already have type hints, and adding the types in the docstring means that, if we ever change the variables' types, we'd need to update the type hints in two separate places.

Could you make similar changes in the other docstrings as well?

data_structures/binary_tree/morris_inorder_traversal.py
Comment on lines +142 to +144



Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Suggested change

This was referenced Oct 5, 2024
Closed
Closed
@kuntal0901
Copy link
Author

@tianyizheng02 I've implemented the changes you requested. Could you review them and let me know if there are any further adjustments needed?

@kuntal0901 kuntal0901 closed this Oct 9, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@tianyizheng02 tianyizheng02 Awaiting requested review from tianyizheng02

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
awaiting reviews This PR is ready to be reviewed
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
2 participants
@kuntal0901 @tianyizheng02