1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
|
#include <stdio.h>
/* The C Programming Language: 2nd Edition
*
* Exercise 3-1: Our binary search makes two tests inside the loop, when
* one would suffice (at the price of more tests outside). Write a version
* with only one test inside the loop and measure the difference in run-
* time.
*
* Answer: I don't know how to measure the performance of the original
* function. `time` reports 0.001 sec, so it's not precise enough.
*
* Anyway, the trick is to create a loop that will exit on two conditions:
* either the last-inspected integer in the array matches the one we're
* looking for, or it doesn't. The only issue with this is it won't exit
* the loop as soon as it's found; it may take a few more iterations for it
* to fully exit, where it will determine which condition made it exit.
*
* I don't have a good tool to measure execution time with (that I know of), so
* my best guess is binsearch2 is faster because it uses only one test in the
* while loop. However, it won't exit the loop as soon as the match is found; it
* needs another few iterations for 'low' to equal or surpass 'high'.
*/
int binsearch(int x, int v[], int n) {
int low, mid, high;
low = 0;
high = n - 1;
while (low <= high) {
mid = (low + high) / 2;
if (x < v[mid]) {
high = mid - 1;
} else if (x > v[mid]) {
low = mid + 1;
} else {
return mid;
}
}
return -1;
}
int binsearch2(int x, int v[], int n) {
int low, mid, high;
low = 0;
high = n - 1;
while (low < high) {
mid = (low + high) / 2;
if (x <= v[mid]) {
high = mid;
} else {
low = mid + 1;
}
}
if (x == v[low]) {
return low;
} else {
return -1;
}
}
int main() {
int foo[5] = {1, 2, 3, 5, 6};
int i;
for (i = 1; i < 7; i++) {
printf("binsearch2 for %d is %d\n", i, binsearch2(i, foo, 5));
}
}
|
