Losing head/tail while rewiring
Wrong move: Pointer updates overwrite references before they are saved.
Usually fails on: List becomes disconnected mid-operation.
Fix: Store next pointers first and use a dummy head for safer joins.
Build confidence with an intuition-first walkthrough focused on linked list fundamentals.
Given the head of a singly linked list, reverse the list, and return the reversed list.
Example 1:
Input: head = [1,2,3,4,5] Output: [5,4,3,2,1]
Example 2:
Input: head = [1,2] Output: [2,1]
Example 3:
Input: head = [] Output: []
Constraints:
[0, 5000].-5000 <= Node.val <= 5000Follow up: A linked list can be reversed either iteratively or recursively. Could you implement both?
Problem summary: Given the head of a singly linked list, reverse the list, and return the reversed list.
Start with the most direct exhaustive search. That gives a correctness anchor before optimizing.
Pattern signal: Linked List
[1,2,3,4,5]
[1,2]
[]
reverse-linked-list-ii)binary-tree-upside-down)palindrome-linked-list)reverse-nodes-in-even-length-groups)maximum-twin-sum-of-a-linked-list)Source-backed implementations are provided below for direct study and interview prep.
// Accepted solution for LeetCode #206: Reverse Linked List
/**
* Definition for singly-linked list.
* public class ListNode {
* int val;
* ListNode next;
* ListNode() {}
* ListNode(int val) { this.val = val; }
* ListNode(int val, ListNode next) { this.val = val; this.next = next; }
* }
*/
class Solution {
public ListNode reverseList(ListNode head) {
ListNode dummy = new ListNode();
ListNode curr = head;
while (curr != null) {
ListNode next = curr.next;
curr.next = dummy.next;
dummy.next = curr;
curr = next;
}
return dummy.next;
}
}
// Accepted solution for LeetCode #206: Reverse Linked List
/**
* Definition for singly-linked list.
* type ListNode struct {
* Val int
* Next *ListNode
* }
*/
func reverseList(head *ListNode) *ListNode {
dummy := &ListNode{}
curr := head
for curr != nil {
next := curr.Next
curr.Next = dummy.Next
dummy.Next = curr
curr = next
}
return dummy.Next
}
# Accepted solution for LeetCode #206: Reverse Linked List
# Definition for singly-linked list.
# class ListNode:
# def __init__(self, val=0, next=None):
# self.val = val
# self.next = next
class Solution:
def reverseList(self, head: ListNode) -> ListNode:
dummy = ListNode()
curr = head
while curr:
next = curr.next
curr.next = dummy.next
dummy.next = curr
curr = next
return dummy.next
// Accepted solution for LeetCode #206: Reverse Linked List
// Definition for singly-linked list.
// #[derive(PartialEq, Eq, Clone, Debug)]
// pub struct ListNode {
// pub val: i32,
// pub next: Option<Box<ListNode>>
// }
//
// impl ListNode {
// #[inline]
// fn new(val: i32) -> Self {
// ListNode {
// next: None,
// val
// }
// }
// }
impl Solution {
pub fn reverse_list(head: Option<Box<ListNode>>) -> Option<Box<ListNode>> {
let mut head = head;
let mut pre = None;
while let Some(mut node) = head {
head = node.next.take();
node.next = pre.take();
pre = Some(node);
}
pre
}
}
// Accepted solution for LeetCode #206: Reverse Linked List
/**
* Definition for singly-linked list.
* class ListNode {
* val: number
* next: ListNode | null
* constructor(val?: number, next?: ListNode | null) {
* this.val = (val===undefined ? 0 : val)
* this.next = (next===undefined ? null : next)
* }
* }
*/
function reverseList(head: ListNode | null): ListNode | null {
if (head == null) {
return head;
}
let pre = null;
let cur = head;
while (cur != null) {
const next = cur.next;
cur.next = pre;
[pre, cur] = [cur, next];
}
return pre;
}
Use this to step through a reusable interview workflow for this problem.
Copy all n nodes into an array (O(n) time and space), then use array indexing for random access. Operations like reversal or middle-finding become trivial with indices, but the O(n) extra space defeats the purpose of using a linked list.
Most linked list operations traverse the list once (O(n)) and re-wire pointers in-place (O(1) extra space). The brute force often copies nodes to an array to enable random access, costing O(n) space. In-place pointer manipulation eliminates that.
Review these before coding to avoid predictable interview regressions.
Wrong move: Pointer updates overwrite references before they are saved.
Usually fails on: List becomes disconnected mid-operation.
Fix: Store next pointers first and use a dummy head for safer joins.