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 a 0-indexed m x n integer matrix grid. The width of a column is the maximum length of its integers.
grid = [[-10], [3], [12]], the width of the only column is 3 since -10 is of length 3.Return an integer array ans of size n where ans[i] is the width of the ith column.
The length of an integer x with len digits is equal to len if x is non-negative, and len + 1 otherwise.
Example 1:
Input: grid = [[1],[22],[333]] Output: [3] Explanation: In the 0th column, 333 is of length 3.
Example 2:
Input: grid = [[-15,1,3],[15,7,12],[5,6,-2]] Output: [3,1,2] Explanation: In the 0th column, only -15 is of length 3. In the 1st column, all integers are of length 1. In the 2nd column, both 12 and -2 are of length 2.
Constraints:
m == grid.lengthn == grid[i].length1 <= m, n <= 100 -109 <= grid[r][c] <= 109Problem summary: You are given a 0-indexed m x n integer matrix grid. The width of a column is the maximum length of its integers. For example, if grid = [[-10], [3], [12]], the width of the only column is 3 since -10 is of length 3. Return an integer array ans of size n where ans[i] is the width of the ith column. The length of an integer x with len digits is equal to len if x is non-negative, and len + 1 otherwise.
Start with the most direct exhaustive search. That gives a correctness anchor before optimizing.
Pattern signal: Array
[[1],[22],[333]]
[[-15,1,3],[15,7,12],[5,6,-2]]
next-greater-numerically-balanced-number)Source-backed implementations are provided below for direct study and interview prep.
// Accepted solution for LeetCode #2639: Find the Width of Columns of a Grid
class Solution {
public int[] findColumnWidth(int[][] grid) {
int n = grid[0].length;
int[] ans = new int[n];
for (var row : grid) {
for (int j = 0; j < n; ++j) {
int w = String.valueOf(row[j]).length();
ans[j] = Math.max(ans[j], w);
}
}
return ans;
}
}
// Accepted solution for LeetCode #2639: Find the Width of Columns of a Grid
func findColumnWidth(grid [][]int) []int {
ans := make([]int, len(grid[0]))
for _, row := range grid {
for j, x := range row {
w := len(strconv.Itoa(x))
ans[j] = max(ans[j], w)
}
}
return ans
}
# Accepted solution for LeetCode #2639: Find the Width of Columns of a Grid
class Solution:
def findColumnWidth(self, grid: List[List[int]]) -> List[int]:
return [max(len(str(x)) for x in col) for col in zip(*grid)]
// Accepted solution for LeetCode #2639: Find the Width of Columns of a Grid
impl Solution {
pub fn find_column_width(grid: Vec<Vec<i32>>) -> Vec<i32> {
let mut ans = vec![0; grid[0].len()];
for row in grid.iter() {
for (j, num) in row.iter().enumerate() {
let width = num.to_string().len() as i32;
ans[j] = std::cmp::max(ans[j], width);
}
}
ans
}
}
// Accepted solution for LeetCode #2639: Find the Width of Columns of a Grid
function findColumnWidth(grid: number[][]): number[] {
const n = grid[0].length;
const ans: number[] = new Array(n).fill(0);
for (const row of grid) {
for (let j = 0; j < n; ++j) {
const w: number = String(row[j]).length;
ans[j] = Math.max(ans[j], w);
}
}
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.