Complete Design-2

[PrakarshKamal]

No description provided.

[super30admin]

Strengths:

• The implementation of the queue using two stacks is correct and efficient.
• The code is well-structured and easy to understand.
• Time and space complexities are optimal.

Areas for Improvement:

• The class should be named "MyQueue" as per the problem statement. The current name "QueueUsingStacks" might not be accepted by an automated testing system that expects the class name "MyQueue".
• Consider reducing code duplication: The transfer logic (moving from inStack to outStack) is repeated in both pop and peek. You can refactor by having peek handle the transfer and then pop can call peek and then pop from outStack. For example:
  public int pop() {
  int top = peek();
  outStack.pop();
  return top;
  }
  This way, the transfer logic is only in peek.
• Ensure that you are only submitting the required solution for the problem. The DesignHashMap.java file is not part of this problem and should not be included.

[super30admin]

Strengths:

• The queue implementation using two stacks is correct and efficient.
• The code is well-structured and easy to understand.
• The time and space complexities are optimal.

Areas for Improvement:

1. The class name should be changed to "MyQueue" to exactly match the problem requirement. This is important because in many coding platforms, the class name must be exactly as specified for the solution to be accepted.
2. The pop method should handle the case when the queue is empty. Currently, if both stacks are empty, calling pop will throw an exception (because outStack.pop() will be called on an empty stack). The problem states that all calls to pop are valid, meaning the queue won't be empty when pop is called. However, it's good practice to handle edge cases. The reference solution checks if the queue is empty in the pop method and returns -1 (or throws an exception) but the problem constraints say all calls to pop are valid, so it's acceptable. But to be safe, you might consider adding a check.
3. The peek method similarly does not check for an empty queue. Again, the problem says all calls to peek are valid, so it's acceptable. But if you want to be defensive, you could add a check.
4. The inclusion of the DesignHashMap.java file is unnecessary for this problem. Make sure to only submit the relevant code for the problem at hand.

Overall, the queue implementation is correct and efficient. The main issue is the class name not matching the problem's requirement.