Off-by-one on range boundaries
Wrong move: Loop endpoints miss first/last candidate.
Usually fails on: Fails on minimal arrays and exact-boundary answers.
Fix: Re-derive loops from inclusive/exclusive ranges before coding.
Build confidence with an intuition-first walkthrough focused on array fundamentals.
You are given a binary array nums (0-indexed).
We define xi as the number whose binary representation is the subarray nums[0..i] (from most-significant-bit to least-significant-bit).
nums = [1,0,1], then x0 = 1, x1 = 2, and x2 = 5.Return an array of booleans answer where answer[i] is true if xi is divisible by 5.
Example 1:
Input: nums = [0,1,1] Output: [true,false,false] Explanation: The input numbers in binary are 0, 01, 011; which are 0, 1, and 3 in base-10. Only the first number is divisible by 5, so answer[0] is true.
Example 2:
Input: nums = [1,1,1] Output: [false,false,false]
Constraints:
1 <= nums.length <= 105nums[i] is either 0 or 1.Problem summary: You are given a binary array nums (0-indexed). We define xi as the number whose binary representation is the subarray nums[0..i] (from most-significant-bit to least-significant-bit). For example, if nums = [1,0,1], then x0 = 1, x1 = 2, and x2 = 5. Return an array of booleans answer where answer[i] is true if xi is divisible by 5.
Start with the most direct exhaustive search. That gives a correctness anchor before optimizing.
Pattern signal: Array · Bit Manipulation
[0,1,1]
[1,1,1]
average-value-of-even-numbers-that-are-divisible-by-three)find-the-maximum-divisibility-score)Source-backed implementations are provided below for direct study and interview prep.
// Accepted solution for LeetCode #1018: Binary Prefix Divisible By 5
class Solution {
public List<Boolean> prefixesDivBy5(int[] nums) {
List<Boolean> ans = new ArrayList<>();
int x = 0;
for (int v : nums) {
x = (x << 1 | v) % 5;
ans.add(x == 0);
}
return ans;
}
}
// Accepted solution for LeetCode #1018: Binary Prefix Divisible By 5
func prefixesDivBy5(nums []int) (ans []bool) {
x := 0
for _, v := range nums {
x = (x<<1 | v) % 5
ans = append(ans, x == 0)
}
return
}
# Accepted solution for LeetCode #1018: Binary Prefix Divisible By 5
class Solution:
def prefixesDivBy5(self, nums: List[int]) -> List[bool]:
ans = []
x = 0
for v in nums:
x = (x << 1 | v) % 5
ans.append(x == 0)
return ans
// Accepted solution for LeetCode #1018: Binary Prefix Divisible By 5
struct Solution;
impl Solution {
fn prefixes_div_by5(a: Vec<i32>) -> Vec<bool> {
let mut x = 0;
let n = a.len();
let mut res: Vec<bool> = vec![false; n];
for i in 0..n {
x = (x * 2 + a[i]) % 5;
res[i] = x == 0;
}
res
}
}
#[test]
fn test() {
let a = vec![0, 1, 1];
let res = vec![true, false, false];
assert_eq!(Solution::prefixes_div_by5(a), res);
let a = vec![1, 1, 1];
let res = vec![false, false, false];
assert_eq!(Solution::prefixes_div_by5(a), res);
let a = vec![0, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1];
let res = vec![true, false, false, false, true, false];
assert_eq!(Solution::prefixes_div_by5(a), res);
let a = vec![1, 1, 1, 0, 1];
let res = vec![false, false, false, false, false];
assert_eq!(Solution::prefixes_div_by5(a), res);
}
// Accepted solution for LeetCode #1018: Binary Prefix Divisible By 5
function prefixesDivBy5(nums: number[]): boolean[] {
const ans: boolean[] = [];
let x = 0;
for (const v of nums) {
x = ((x << 1) | v) % 5;
ans.push(x === 0);
}
return ans;
}
Use this to step through a reusable interview workflow for this problem.
Sort the array in O(n log n), then scan for the missing or unique element by comparing adjacent pairs. Sorting requires O(n) auxiliary space (or O(1) with in-place sort but O(n log n) time remains). The sort step dominates.
Bitwise operations (AND, OR, XOR, shifts) are O(1) per operation on fixed-width integers. A single pass through the input with bit operations gives O(n) time. The key insight: XOR of a number with itself is 0, which eliminates duplicates without extra space.
Review these before coding to avoid predictable interview regressions.
Wrong move: Loop endpoints miss first/last candidate.
Usually fails on: Fails on minimal arrays and exact-boundary answers.
Fix: Re-derive loops from inclusive/exclusive ranges before coding.