Pointing out a mistake is toxicity? Your ego is off the charts. Also, I gave you a solution that would probably be _better_ than yours in 99% of scenarios, a simple vector from any standard library, std::vector in C++, and Vec in Rust. This solution gives you O(1) worst case for peek, and amortized worst case O(1) for the other operations.
To be actually toxic for a moment, you do know that amortized and average are different right?
There is an easy solution to get O(1) for all operations too by allowing them to throw an exception: a simple array. There is no other O(1) solution for all operations that I am aware. In fact it is probably not too difficult to prove that such a solution does not exist.
If your interviewer is asking for solution and you keep insisting that "I have you a solution"... without actual code... Also saying my ego is off the charts. Good luck passing interviews with that attitude.
Comments
Pointing out a mistake is toxicity? Your ego is off the charts. Also, I gave you a solution that would probably be _better_ than yours in 99% of scenarios, a simple vector from any standard library, std::vector in C++, and Vec in Rust. This solution gives you O(1) worst case for peek, and amortized worst case O(1) for the other operations.
To be actually toxic for a moment, you do know that amortized and average are different right?
There is an easy solution to get O(1) for all operations too by allowing them to throw an exception: a simple array. There is no other O(1) solution for all operations that I am aware. In fact it is probably not too difficult to prove that such a solution does not exist.
If your interviewer is asking for solution and you keep insisting that "I have you a solution"... without actual code... Also saying my ego is off the charts. Good luck passing interviews with that attitude.