So here’s the challenge. Given 2 integers named a and b:
// Find the 2 largest numbers, smaller than a and b, that are divisible by each other.
// input: a:102,b:53 // output: (102,51)
// input: a:7,b:4 // output: (6,3)
// input: a:3,b:2 // output: (2,2)
The catch is, I don’t want to brute force it. I think it comes out to O(n²).
Here’s the signature for the method:
static Tuple<int, int> Analyze(int a, int b)
{
if (a % b == 0)
return new Tuple<int, int>(a, b);
else
// Here’s where the algorithm kicks in
}
Here’s a sample implementation:
static Tuple<int, int> Analyze(int left, int right)
{
if (left % right == 0)
return new Tuple<int, int>(left, right);
else
{
for (int i = left; i >= right; i--)
{
for (int j = right; j >= 0; j--)
if (i % j == 0)
return new Tuple<int, int>(i, j);
else
i--;
}
}
return null;
}
Here’s the test client:
class Program
{
static void Main(string[] args)
{
Console.WriteLine(Analyze(102, 53));
Console.WriteLine(Analyze(6, 4));
Console.WriteLine(Analyze(3, 2));
}
}
There are obviously problems with my implementation, but it’s not bad for starters. For instance when I use 106 and 54 for my arguments, had I not decremented the outter loop variable (i-- in the else block), I’d have found a match with 106 and 53. Instead I find a match a 104 and 52, which isn’t quite right but is relatively close to the desired result. However, my sample implementation is much faster than a brute forced approach because I’d never loop anymore than b times, making it O(b). Thoughts, inputs?