假设您想递归地实现一个二叉树的宽度优先搜索。你会怎么做?
是否可以只使用调用堆栈作为辅助存储?
假设您想递归地实现一个二叉树的宽度优先搜索。你会怎么做?
是否可以只使用调用堆栈作为辅助存储?
当前回答
二进制(或n-ary)树的BFS可以在没有队列的情况下递归完成,如下所示(在Java中):
public class BreathFirst {
static class Node {
Node(int value) {
this(value, 0);
}
Node(int value, int nChildren) {
this.value = value;
this.children = new Node[nChildren];
}
int value;
Node[] children;
}
static void breathFirst(Node root, Consumer<? super Node> printer) {
boolean keepGoing = true;
for (int level = 0; keepGoing; level++) {
keepGoing = breathFirst(root, printer, level);
}
}
static boolean breathFirst(Node node, Consumer<? super Node> printer, int depth) {
if (depth < 0 || node == null) return false;
if (depth == 0) {
printer.accept(node);
return true;
}
boolean any = false;
for (final Node child : node.children) {
any |= breathFirst(child, printer, depth - 1);
}
return any;
}
}
按升序遍历打印数字1-12的示例:
public static void main(String... args) {
// 1
// / | \
// 2 3 4
// / | | \
// 5 6 7 8
// / | | \
// 9 10 11 12
Node root = new Node(1, 3);
root.children[0] = new Node(2, 2);
root.children[1] = new Node(3);
root.children[2] = new Node(4, 2);
root.children[0].children[0] = new Node(5, 2);
root.children[0].children[1] = new Node(6);
root.children[2].children[0] = new Node(7, 2);
root.children[2].children[1] = new Node(8);
root.children[0].children[0].children[0] = new Node(9);
root.children[0].children[0].children[1] = new Node(10);
root.children[2].children[0].children[0] = new Node(11);
root.children[2].children[0].children[1] = new Node(12);
breathFirst(root, n -> System.out.println(n.value));
}
其他回答
我发现了一个非常漂亮的递归(甚至函数)宽度优先遍历相关算法。不是我的想法,但我认为在这个话题中应该提到它。
Chris Okasaki在http://okasaki.blogspot.de/2008/07/breadth-first-numbering-algorithm-in.html上用3张图片非常清楚地解释了他的ICFP 2000的宽度优先编号算法。
Debasish Ghosh的Scala实现,我在http://debasishg.blogspot.de/2008/09/breadth-first-numbering-okasakis.html找到的,是:
trait Tree[+T]
case class Node[+T](data: T, left: Tree[T], right: Tree[T]) extends Tree[T]
case object E extends Tree[Nothing]
def bfsNumForest[T](i: Int, trees: Queue[Tree[T]]): Queue[Tree[Int]] = {
if (trees.isEmpty) Queue.Empty
else {
trees.dequeue match {
case (E, ts) =>
bfsNumForest(i, ts).enqueue[Tree[Int]](E)
case (Node(d, l, r), ts) =>
val q = ts.enqueue(l, r)
val qq = bfsNumForest(i+1, q)
val (bb, qqq) = qq.dequeue
val (aa, tss) = qqq.dequeue
tss.enqueue[org.dg.collection.BFSNumber.Tree[Int]](Node(i, aa, bb))
}
}
}
def bfsNumTree[T](t: Tree[T]): Tree[Int] = {
val q = Queue.Empty.enqueue[Tree[T]](t)
val qq = bfsNumForest(1, q)
qq.dequeue._1
}
愚蠢的方式:
template<typename T>
struct Node { Node* left; Node* right; T value; };
template<typename T, typename P>
bool searchNodeDepth(Node<T>* node, Node<T>** result, int depth, P pred) {
if (!node) return false;
if (!depth) {
if (pred(node->value)) {
*result = node;
}
return true;
}
--depth;
searchNodeDepth(node->left, result, depth, pred);
if (!*result)
searchNodeDepth(node->right, result, depth, pred);
return true;
}
template<typename T, typename P>
Node<T>* searchNode(Node<T>* node, P pred) {
Node<T>* result = NULL;
int depth = 0;
while (searchNodeDepth(node, &result, depth, pred) && !result)
++depth;
return result;
}
int main()
{
// a c f
// b e
// d
Node<char*>
a = { NULL, NULL, "A" },
c = { NULL, NULL, "C" },
b = { &a, &c, "B" },
f = { NULL, NULL, "F" },
e = { NULL, &f, "E" },
d = { &b, &e, "D" };
Node<char*>* found = searchNode(&d, [](char* value) -> bool {
printf("%s\n", value);
return !strcmp((char*)value, "F");
});
printf("found: %s\n", found->value);
return 0;
}
我想在上面的答案中加上我的观点,如果语言支持生成器之类的东西,bfs可以协递归地完成。
首先,@Tanzelax的回答是:
宽度优先遍历传统上使用队列,而不是堆栈。队列和堆栈的性质几乎是相反的,因此试图使用调用堆栈(因此得名为堆栈)作为辅助存储(队列)几乎是注定要失败的
实际上,普通函数调用的堆栈不会像普通堆栈那样运行。但是生成器函数将暂停函数的执行,因此它给了我们产生下一层节点的子节点的机会,而无需深入研究节点的更深层次的后代。
下面的代码是Python中的递归bfs。
def bfs(root):
yield root
for n in bfs(root):
for c in n.children:
yield c
这里的直觉是:
BFS首先将根作为第一个结果返回 假设我们已经有了BFS序列,BFS中的下一层元素是序列中前一个节点的直接子节点 重复以上两个步骤
下面是递归BFS的Scala 2.11.4实现。为了简洁起见,我牺牲了尾部调用优化,但是TCOd版本非常相似。参见@snv的帖子。
import scala.collection.immutable.Queue
object RecursiveBfs {
def bfs[A](tree: Tree[A], target: A): Boolean = {
bfs(Queue(tree), target)
}
private def bfs[A](forest: Queue[Tree[A]], target: A): Boolean = {
forest.dequeueOption exists {
case (E, tail) => bfs(tail, target)
case (Node(value, _, _), _) if value == target => true
case (Node(_, l, r), tail) => bfs(tail.enqueue(List(l, r)), target)
}
}
sealed trait Tree[+A]
case class Node[+A](data: A, left: Tree[A], right: Tree[A]) extends Tree[A]
case object E extends Tree[Nothing]
}
Here is a JavaScript Implementation that fakes Breadth First Traversal with Depth First recursion. I'm storing the node values at each depth inside an array, inside of a hash. If a level already exists(we have a collision), so we just push to the array at that level. You could use an array instead of a JavaScript object as well since our levels are numeric and can serve as array indices. You can return nodes, values, convert to a Linked List, or whatever you want. I'm just returning values for the sake of simplicity.
BinarySearchTree.prototype.breadthFirstRec = function() {
var levels = {};
var traverse = function(current, depth) {
if (!current) return null;
if (!levels[depth]) levels[depth] = [current.value];
else levels[depth].push(current.value);
traverse(current.left, depth + 1);
traverse(current.right, depth + 1);
};
traverse(this.root, 0);
return levels;
};
var bst = new BinarySearchTree();
bst.add(20, 22, 8, 4, 12, 10, 14, 24);
console.log('Recursive Breadth First: ', bst.breadthFirstRec());
/*Recursive Breadth First:
{ '0': [ 20 ],
'1': [ 8, 22 ],
'2': [ 4, 12, 24 ],
'3': [ 10, 14 ] } */
下面是一个使用迭代方法的实际广度优先遍历的示例。
BinarySearchTree.prototype.breadthFirst = function() {
var result = '',
queue = [],
current = this.root;
if (!current) return null;
queue.push(current);
while (current = queue.shift()) {
result += current.value + ' ';
current.left && queue.push(current.left);
current.right && queue.push(current.right);
}
return result;
};
console.log('Breadth First: ', bst.breadthFirst());
//Breadth First: 20 8 22 4 12 24 10 14