我可能会非常晚和新的处理这个线程。但还是. .

为什么不能将节点的地址和“下一个”节点指向存储在表中

如果我们可以这样做

node present: (present node addr) (next node address)

node 1: addr1: 0x100 addr2: 0x200 ( no present node address till this point had 0x200)
node 2: addr2: 0x200 addr3: 0x300 ( no present node address till this point had 0x300)
node 3: addr3: 0x300 addr4: 0x400 ( no present node address till this point had 0x400)
node 4: addr4: 0x400 addr5: 0x500 ( no present node address till this point had 0x500)
node 5: addr5: 0x500 addr6: 0x600 ( no present node address till this point had 0x600)
node 6: addr6: 0x600 addr4: 0x400 ( ONE present node address till this point had 0x400)

这样就形成了一个循环。

下面是检测循环的解决方案。

public boolean hasCycle(ListNode head) {
            ListNode slow =head;
            ListNode fast =head;

            while(fast!=null && fast.next!=null){
                slow = slow.next; // slow pointer only one hop
                fast = fast.next.next; // fast pointer two hops 

                if(slow == fast)    return true; // retrun true if fast meet slow pointer
            }

            return false; // return false if fast pointer stop at end 
        }

public boolean isCircular() {

    if (head == null)
        return false;

    Node temp1 = head;
    Node temp2 = head;

    try {
        while (temp2.next != null) {

            temp2 = temp2.next.next.next;
            temp1 = temp1.next;

            if (temp1 == temp2 || temp1 == temp2.next) 
                return true;    

        }
    } catch (NullPointerException ex) {
        return false;

    }

    return false;

}

这段代码经过优化，将比选择的最佳答案更快地产生结果。这段代码避免了进入一个非常长的追逐向前和向后节点指针的过程，如果我们遵循'最佳答案'方法，在以下情况下将发生这种情况。看一下下面的演练，你就会明白我想说的是什么。然后通过下面给出的方法来观察问题，并测量否。为了找到答案所采取的步骤。

1 - > 2 - > 9 - > 3 ^ -- -- -- -- -- -- -- - ^

代码如下:

boolean loop(node *head)
{
 node *back=head;
 node *front=head;

 while(front && front->next)
 {
  front=front->next->next;
  if(back==front)
  return true;
  else
  back=back->next;
 }
return false
}

public boolean hasLoop(Node start){   
   TreeSet<Node> set = new TreeSet<Node>();
   Node lookingAt = start;

   while (lookingAt.peek() != null){
       lookingAt = lookingAt.next;

       if (set.contains(lookingAt){
           return false;
        } else {
        set.put(lookingAt);
        }

        return true;
}   
// Inside our Node class:        
public Node peek(){
   return this.next;
}

请原谅我的无知(我对Java和编程仍然相当陌生)，但为什么上面的方法不能工作呢?

I guess this doesn't solve the constant space issue... but it does at least get there in a reasonable time, correct? It will only take the space of the linked list plus the space of a set with n elements (where n is the number of elements in the linked list, or the number of elements until it reaches a loop). And for time, worst-case analysis, I think, would suggest O(nlog(n)). SortedSet look-ups for contains() are log(n) (check the javadoc, but I'm pretty sure TreeSet's underlying structure is TreeMap, whose in turn is a red-black tree), and in the worst case (no loops, or loop at very end), it will have to do n look-ups.

乌龟和兔子的另一种解决方案，不太好，因为我暂时改变了列表:

这个想法是遍历列表，并在执行过程中反转它。然后，当你第一次到达一个已经被访问过的节点时，它的next指针将指向“向后”，导致迭代再次朝第一个方向进行，并在那里终止。

Node prev = null;
Node cur = first;
while (cur != null) {
    Node next = cur.next;
    cur.next = prev;
    prev = cur;
    cur = next;
}
boolean hasCycle = prev == first && first != null && first.next != null;

// reconstruct the list
cur = prev;
prev = null;
while (cur != null) {
    Node next = cur.next;
    cur.next = prev;
    prev = cur;
    cur = next;
}

return hasCycle;

测试代码:

static void assertSameOrder(Node[] nodes) {
    for (int i = 0; i < nodes.length - 1; i++) {
        assert nodes[i].next == nodes[i + 1];
    }
}

public static void main(String[] args) {
    Node[] nodes = new Node[100];
    for (int i = 0; i < nodes.length; i++) {
        nodes[i] = new Node();
    }
    for (int i = 0; i < nodes.length - 1; i++) {
        nodes[i].next = nodes[i + 1];
    }
    Node first = nodes[0];
    Node max = nodes[nodes.length - 1];

    max.next = null;
    assert !hasCycle(first);
    assertSameOrder(nodes);
    max.next = first;
    assert hasCycle(first);
    assertSameOrder(nodes);
    max.next = max;
    assert hasCycle(first);
    assertSameOrder(nodes);
    max.next = nodes[50];
    assert hasCycle(first);
    assertSameOrder(nodes);
}