if i have the following node class
class Node {
public:
Node() { next = NULL; prev = NULL; }
~Node() {}
public :
Node *next;
Node *prev;
T data;
};
how do i create an empty lin开发者_如何学Cked list in the function
LinkedList::LinkedList()
my linked list classs has the following functions
void append(T item);
T get(int idx);
void insert(int idx, T item);
void map(T (*pf)(T item));
T remove(int index);
int size();
void unshift(T item);
Doubly linked lists usually have a reference to the first and (sometimes) last element in the list.
Node *first, *last;
In your constructor, just set these to NULL
. Then make an isEmpty
method which checks for this condition, and you're done.
LinkedList::LinkedList()
{
first = NULL;
last = NULL;
}
bool LinkedList::isEmpty()
{
return (first == NULL) && (last == NULL);
}
My solution (from pre-standard days) has always been to have
a NodeBase
class with the pointers, and derive from that to
add the data. This allows my DLList
object to contain
a NodeBase
, rather than it having to manage the pointers
seperately. And NodeBase
always had a constructor which
linked it to nowhere—typically, by setting both pointers
to this, e.g.:
struct NodeBase
{
NodeBase* next;
NodeBase* prec;
NodeBase()
: next(this)
, prec(this)
{
}
~NodeBase()
{
next->prec = prec;
prec->next = next;
}
};
Doing so means that there's no clear end of list indicator (the actual list is circular), so you have to keep track of where you started when iterating, but it makes so many other operations so much easier.
As the other answers indicate, there's more than one way to do it. Here's an especially peculiar one for your information: although it's not portable C so perhaps is better suited to assembly:
struct Node {
Node *next;
Node *prev;
};
struct List {
Node *a;
Node *b;
Node *c;
List : a(tail()), b(0), c(head())
Node *head() { return (Node *)&a; }
Node *tail() { return (Node *)&b; }
};
So, a struct contains a dummy head node (whose prev
pointer of course is always 0) and a dummy tail node (whose next
pointer is always 0), and to save a massive sizeof(Node*)
bytes storage per list, they overlap (which is what makes it non-portable). The overlap isn't essential, you could put two Node
in the List
instead of three Node*
.
This is a useful structure in that it gives you both a "before-the-beginning" and an "after-the-end" node in the list, which means you can perform all of remove
, insert_after
and insert_before
on nodes without reference to the list head at all. In that respect it's like James's circular list, but unlike his you can also check for the ends by looking for the null pointer - also without reference to the head.
File under, "tricks I don't need to play".
精彩评论