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.
Move from brute-force thinking to an efficient approach using array strategy.
Example 1:
Input: timePoints = ["23:59","00:00"] Output: 1
Example 2:
Input: timePoints = ["00:00","23:59","00:00"] Output: 0
Constraints:
2 <= timePoints.length <= 2 * 104timePoints[i] is in the format "HH:MM".Problem summary: Given a list of 24-hour clock time points in "HH:MM" format, return the minimum minutes difference between any two time-points in the list.
Start with the most direct exhaustive search. That gives a correctness anchor before optimizing.
Pattern signal: Array · Math
["23:59","00:00"]
["00:00","23:59","00:00"]
minimum-cost-to-set-cooking-time)Source-backed implementations are provided below for direct study and interview prep.
// Accepted solution for LeetCode #539: Minimum Time Difference
class Solution {
public int findMinDifference(List<String> timePoints) {
if (timePoints.size() > 1440) {
return 0;
}
int n = timePoints.size();
int[] nums = new int[n + 1];
for (int i = 0; i < n; ++i) {
String[] t = timePoints.get(i).split(":");
nums[i] = Integer.parseInt(t[0]) * 60 + Integer.parseInt(t[1]);
}
Arrays.sort(nums, 0, n);
nums[n] = nums[0] + 1440;
int ans = 1 << 30;
for (int i = 1; i <= n; ++i) {
ans = Math.min(ans, nums[i] - nums[i - 1]);
}
return ans;
}
}
// Accepted solution for LeetCode #539: Minimum Time Difference
func findMinDifference(timePoints []string) int {
if len(timePoints) > 1440 {
return 0
}
n := len(timePoints)
nums := make([]int, n+1)
for i, time := range timePoints {
parts := strings.Split(time, ":")
hours, _ := strconv.Atoi(parts[0])
minutes, _ := strconv.Atoi(parts[1])
nums[i] = hours*60 + minutes
}
sort.Ints(nums[:n])
nums[n] = nums[0] + 1440
ans := 1 << 30
for i := 1; i <= n; i++ {
ans = min(ans, nums[i]-nums[i-1])
}
return ans
}
# Accepted solution for LeetCode #539: Minimum Time Difference
class Solution:
def findMinDifference(self, timePoints: List[str]) -> int:
if len(timePoints) > 1440:
return 0
nums = sorted(int(x[:2]) * 60 + int(x[3:]) for x in timePoints)
nums.append(nums[0] + 1440)
return min(b - a for a, b in pairwise(nums))
// Accepted solution for LeetCode #539: Minimum Time Difference
impl Solution {
pub fn find_min_difference(time_points: Vec<String>) -> i32 {
if time_points.len() > 1440 {
return 0;
}
let n = time_points.len();
let mut nums: Vec<i32> = Vec::with_capacity(n + 1);
for time in time_points.iter() {
let parts: Vec<i32> = time.split(':').map(|s| s.parse().unwrap()).collect();
let minutes = parts[0] * 60 + parts[1];
nums.push(minutes);
}
nums.sort();
nums.push(nums[0] + 1440);
let mut ans = i32::MAX;
for i in 1..=n {
ans = ans.min(nums[i] - nums[i - 1]);
}
ans
}
}
// Accepted solution for LeetCode #539: Minimum Time Difference
function findMinDifference(timePoints: string[]): number {
if (timePoints.length > 1440) {
return 0;
}
const n = timePoints.length;
const nums: number[] = Array(n + 1);
for (let i = 0; i < n; ++i) {
const [hours, minutes] = timePoints[i].split(':').map(Number);
nums[i] = hours * 60 + minutes;
}
nums.sort((a, b) => a - b);
nums[n] = nums[0] + 1440;
let ans = 1 << 30;
for (let i = 1; i <= n; ++i) {
ans = Math.min(ans, nums[i] - nums[i - 1]);
}
return ans;
}
Use this to step through a reusable interview workflow for this problem.
Two nested loops check every pair or subarray. The outer loop fixes a starting point, the inner loop extends or searches. For n elements this gives up to n²/2 operations. No extra space, but the quadratic time is prohibitive for large inputs.
Most array problems have an O(n²) brute force (nested loops) and an O(n) optimal (single pass with clever state tracking). The key is identifying what information to maintain as you scan: a running max, a prefix sum, a hash map of seen values, or two pointers.
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.
Wrong move: Temporary multiplications exceed integer bounds.
Usually fails on: Large inputs wrap around unexpectedly.
Fix: Use wider types, modular arithmetic, or rearranged operations.