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 an array of distinct integers arr and an array of integer arrays pieces, where the integers in pieces are distinct. Your goal is to form arr by concatenating the arrays in pieces in any order. However, you are not allowed to reorder the integers in each array pieces[i].
Return true if it is possible to form the array arr from pieces. Otherwise, return false.
Example 1:
Input: arr = [15,88], pieces = [[88],[15]] Output: true Explanation: Concatenate [15] then [88]
Example 2:
Input: arr = [49,18,16], pieces = [[16,18,49]] Output: false Explanation: Even though the numbers match, we cannot reorder pieces[0].
Example 3:
Input: arr = [91,4,64,78], pieces = [[78],[4,64],[91]] Output: true Explanation: Concatenate [91] then [4,64] then [78]
Constraints:
1 <= pieces.length <= arr.length <= 100sum(pieces[i].length) == arr.length1 <= pieces[i].length <= arr.length1 <= arr[i], pieces[i][j] <= 100arr are distinct.pieces are distinct (i.e., If we flatten pieces in a 1D array, all the integers in this array are distinct).Problem summary: You are given an array of distinct integers arr and an array of integer arrays pieces, where the integers in pieces are distinct. Your goal is to form arr by concatenating the arrays in pieces in any order. However, you are not allowed to reorder the integers in each array pieces[i]. Return true if it is possible to form the array arr from pieces. Otherwise, return false.
Start with the most direct exhaustive search. That gives a correctness anchor before optimizing.
Pattern signal: Array · Hash Map
[15,88] [[88],[15]]
[49,18,16] [[16,18,49]]
[91,4,64,78] [[78],[4,64],[91]]
Source-backed implementations are provided below for direct study and interview prep.
// Accepted solution for LeetCode #1640: Check Array Formation Through Concatenation
class Solution {
public boolean canFormArray(int[] arr, int[][] pieces) {
for (int i = 0; i < arr.length;) {
int k = 0;
while (k < pieces.length && pieces[k][0] != arr[i]) {
++k;
}
if (k == pieces.length) {
return false;
}
int j = 0;
while (j < pieces[k].length && arr[i] == pieces[k][j]) {
++i;
++j;
}
}
return true;
}
}
// Accepted solution for LeetCode #1640: Check Array Formation Through Concatenation
func canFormArray(arr []int, pieces [][]int) bool {
for i := 0; i < len(arr); {
k := 0
for k < len(pieces) && pieces[k][0] != arr[i] {
k++
}
if k == len(pieces) {
return false
}
j := 0
for j < len(pieces[k]) && arr[i] == pieces[k][j] {
i, j = i+1, j+1
}
}
return true
}
# Accepted solution for LeetCode #1640: Check Array Formation Through Concatenation
class Solution:
def canFormArray(self, arr: List[int], pieces: List[List[int]]) -> bool:
i = 0
while i < len(arr):
k = 0
while k < len(pieces) and pieces[k][0] != arr[i]:
k += 1
if k == len(pieces):
return False
j = 0
while j < len(pieces[k]) and arr[i] == pieces[k][j]:
i, j = i + 1, j + 1
return True
// Accepted solution for LeetCode #1640: Check Array Formation Through Concatenation
use std::collections::HashMap;
impl Solution {
pub fn can_form_array(arr: Vec<i32>, pieces: Vec<Vec<i32>>) -> bool {
let n = arr.len();
let mut map = HashMap::new();
for (i, v) in pieces.iter().enumerate() {
map.insert(v[0], i);
}
let mut i = 0;
while i < n {
match map.get(&arr[i]) {
None => {
return false;
}
Some(&j) => {
for &item in pieces[j].iter() {
if item != arr[i] {
return false;
}
i += 1;
}
}
}
}
true
}
}
// Accepted solution for LeetCode #1640: Check Array Formation Through Concatenation
function canFormArray(arr: number[], pieces: number[][]): boolean {
const n = arr.length;
let i = 0;
while (i < n) {
const target = arr[i];
const items = pieces.find(v => v[0] === target);
if (items == null) {
return false;
}
for (const item of items) {
if (item !== arr[i]) {
return false;
}
i++;
}
}
return true;
}
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: Zero-count keys stay in map and break distinct/count constraints.
Usually fails on: Window/map size checks are consistently off by one.
Fix: Delete keys when count reaches zero.