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.
You are given an integer array arr of length n that represents a permutation of the integers in the range [0, n - 1].
We split arr into some number of chunks (i.e., partitions), and individually sort each chunk. After concatenating them, the result should equal the sorted array.
Return the largest number of chunks we can make to sort the array.
Example 1:
Input: arr = [4,3,2,1,0] Output: 1 Explanation: Splitting into two or more chunks will not return the required result. For example, splitting into [4, 3], [2, 1, 0] will result in [3, 4, 0, 1, 2], which isn't sorted.
Example 2:
Input: arr = [1,0,2,3,4] Output: 4 Explanation: We can split into two chunks, such as [1, 0], [2, 3, 4]. However, splitting into [1, 0], [2], [3], [4] is the highest number of chunks possible.
Constraints:
n == arr.length1 <= n <= 100 <= arr[i] < narr are unique.Problem summary: You are given an integer array arr of length n that represents a permutation of the integers in the range [0, n - 1]. We split arr into some number of chunks (i.e., partitions), and individually sort each chunk. After concatenating them, the result should equal the sorted array. Return the largest number of chunks we can make to sort the array.
Start with the most direct exhaustive search. That gives a correctness anchor before optimizing.
Pattern signal: Array · Stack · Greedy
[4,3,2,1,0]
[1,0,2,3,4]
max-chunks-to-make-sorted-ii)Source-backed implementations are provided below for direct study and interview prep.
// Accepted solution for LeetCode #769: Max Chunks To Make Sorted
class Solution {
public int maxChunksToSorted(int[] arr) {
int ans = 0, mx = 0;
for (int i = 0; i < arr.length; ++i) {
mx = Math.max(mx, arr[i]);
if (i == mx) {
++ans;
}
}
return ans;
}
}
// Accepted solution for LeetCode #769: Max Chunks To Make Sorted
func maxChunksToSorted(arr []int) int {
ans, mx := 0, 0
for i, v := range arr {
mx = max(mx, v)
if i == mx {
ans++
}
}
return ans
}
# Accepted solution for LeetCode #769: Max Chunks To Make Sorted
class Solution:
def maxChunksToSorted(self, arr: List[int]) -> int:
mx = ans = 0
for i, v in enumerate(arr):
mx = max(mx, v)
if i == mx:
ans += 1
return ans
// Accepted solution for LeetCode #769: Max Chunks To Make Sorted
impl Solution {
pub fn max_chunks_to_sorted(arr: Vec<i32>) -> i32 {
let mut ans = 0;
let mut mx = 0;
for i in 0..arr.len() {
mx = mx.max(arr[i]);
if mx == (i as i32) {
ans += 1;
}
}
ans
}
}
// Accepted solution for LeetCode #769: Max Chunks To Make Sorted
function maxChunksToSorted(arr: number[]): number {
const n = arr.length;
let ans = 0;
let mx = 0;
for (let i = 0; i < n; i++) {
mx = Math.max(arr[i], mx);
if (mx == i) {
ans++;
}
}
return ans;
}
Use this to step through a reusable interview workflow for this problem.
For each element, scan left (or right) to find the next greater/smaller element. The inner scan can visit up to n elements per outer iteration, giving O(n²) total comparisons. No extra space needed beyond loop variables.
Each element is pushed onto the stack at most once and popped at most once, giving 2n total operations = O(n). The stack itself holds at most n elements in the worst case. The key insight: amortized O(1) per element despite the inner while-loop.
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: Pushing without popping stale elements invalidates next-greater/next-smaller logic.
Usually fails on: Indices point to blocked elements and outputs shift.
Fix: Pop while invariant is violated before pushing current element.
Wrong move: Locally optimal choices may fail globally.
Usually fails on: Counterexamples appear on crafted input orderings.
Fix: Verify with exchange argument or monotonic objective before committing.