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.
Given an array of integers nums, sort the array in ascending order and return it.
You must solve the problem without using any built-in functions in O(nlog(n)) time complexity and with the smallest space complexity possible.
Example 1:
Input: nums = [5,2,3,1] Output: [1,2,3,5] Explanation: After sorting the array, the positions of some numbers are not changed (for example, 2 and 3), while the positions of other numbers are changed (for example, 1 and 5).
Example 2:
Input: nums = [5,1,1,2,0,0] Output: [0,0,1,1,2,5] Explanation: Note that the values of nums are not necessarily unique.
Constraints:
1 <= nums.length <= 5 * 104-5 * 104 <= nums[i] <= 5 * 104Problem summary: Given an array of integers nums, sort the array in ascending order and return it. You must solve the problem without using any built-in functions in O(nlog(n)) time complexity and with the smallest space complexity possible.
Start with the most direct exhaustive search. That gives a correctness anchor before optimizing.
Pattern signal: Array
[5,2,3,1]
[5,1,1,2,0,0]
Source-backed implementations are provided below for direct study and interview prep.
// Accepted solution for LeetCode #912: Sort an Array
class Solution {
private int[] nums;
public int[] sortArray(int[] nums) {
this.nums = nums;
quikcSort(0, nums.length - 1);
return nums;
}
private void quikcSort(int l, int r) {
if (l >= r) {
return;
}
int x = nums[(l + r) >> 1];
int i = l - 1, j = r + 1;
while (i < j) {
while (nums[++i] < x) {
}
while (nums[--j] > x) {
}
if (i < j) {
int t = nums[i];
nums[i] = nums[j];
nums[j] = t;
}
}
quikcSort(l, j);
quikcSort(j + 1, r);
}
}
// Accepted solution for LeetCode #912: Sort an Array
func sortArray(nums []int) []int {
quickSort(nums, 0, len(nums)-1)
return nums
}
func quickSort(nums []int, l, r int) {
if l >= r {
return
}
i, j := l-1, r+1
x := nums[(l+r)>>1]
for i < j {
for {
i++
if nums[i] >= x {
break
}
}
for {
j--
if nums[j] <= x {
break
}
}
if i < j {
nums[i], nums[j] = nums[j], nums[i]
}
}
quickSort(nums, l, j)
quickSort(nums, j+1, r)
}
# Accepted solution for LeetCode #912: Sort an Array
class Solution:
def sortArray(self, nums: List[int]) -> List[int]:
def quick_sort(l, r):
if l >= r:
return
x = nums[randint(l, r)]
i, j, k = l - 1, r + 1, l
while k < j:
if nums[k] < x:
nums[i + 1], nums[k] = nums[k], nums[i + 1]
i, k = i + 1, k + 1
elif nums[k] > x:
j -= 1
nums[j], nums[k] = nums[k], nums[j]
else:
k = k + 1
quick_sort(l, i)
quick_sort(j, r)
quick_sort(0, len(nums) - 1)
return nums
// Accepted solution for LeetCode #912: Sort an Array
impl Solution {
pub fn sort_array(mut nums: Vec<i32>) -> Vec<i32> {
let n = nums.len();
Self::quick_sort(&mut nums, 0, n - 1);
return nums;
}
fn quick_sort(nums: &mut Vec<i32>, left: usize, right: usize) {
if left >= right {
return;
}
let mut i = left as i32 - 1;
let mut j = right as i32 + 1;
let pivot = nums[left];
while i < j {
loop {
i += 1;
if nums[i as usize] >= pivot {
break;
}
}
loop {
j -= 1;
if nums[j as usize] <= pivot {
break;
}
}
if i < j {
nums.swap(i as usize, j as usize);
}
}
Self::quick_sort(nums, left, j as usize);
Self::quick_sort(nums, j as usize + 1, right);
}
}
// Accepted solution for LeetCode #912: Sort an Array
function sortArray(nums: number[]): number[] {
function quickSort(l: number, r: number) {
if (l >= r) {
return;
}
let i = l - 1;
let j = r + 1;
const x = nums[(l + r) >> 1];
while (i < j) {
while (nums[++i] < x);
while (nums[--j] > x);
if (i < j) {
[nums[i], nums[j]] = [nums[j], nums[i]];
}
}
quickSort(l, j);
quickSort(j + 1, r);
}
const n = nums.length;
quickSort(0, n - 1);
return nums;
}
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.