(One intermediate revision by one other user not shown)
Line 3: Line 3:
  
 
----
 
----
Got the same thing. --[[User:Asuleime|Asuleime]] 09:40, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
+
Got the same thing. By the way, the simplest (to implement) way to check the length of the shortest path is by running Floyd-Warshall algorithm on your computer (n is the number of vertices, graph[i][j] - the length of the shortest path between vertices i and j):<br>
 +
for(int k=0;k<n;++k)<br>
 +
for(int i=0;i<n;++i)<br>
 +
for(int j=0;j<n;++j)<br>
 +
graph[i][j] = min(graph[i][j], graph[i][k] + graph[k][j]);<br>
 +
--[[User:Asuleime|Asuleime]] 09:40, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
 +
------
 +
Why use floyd warshall when we have no negative weights?...

Latest revision as of 15:19, 14 December 2008

My solution (using Dijkstra's algorithm): Length is 16. (path is a to b to e to h to l to m to p to s to z) Does anyone agree/disagree? -Brian (Thomas34 22:16, 10 December 2008 (UTC))


Got the same thing. By the way, the simplest (to implement) way to check the length of the shortest path is by running Floyd-Warshall algorithm on your computer (n is the number of vertices, graph[i][j] - the length of the shortest path between vertices i and j):
for(int k=0;k<n;++k)
for(int i=0;i<n;++i)
for(int j=0;j<n;++j)
graph[i][j] = min(graph[i][j], graph[i][k] + graph[k][j]);
--Asuleime 09:40, 12 December 2008 (UTC)


Why use floyd warshall when we have no negative weights?...

Alumni Liaison

Ph.D. 2007, working on developing cool imaging technologies for digital cameras, camera phones, and video surveillance cameras.

Buyue Zhang