Losing head/tail while rewiring
Wrong move: Pointer updates overwrite references before they are saved.
Usually fails on: List becomes disconnected mid-operation.
Fix: Store next pointers first and use a dummy head for safer joins.
Build confidence with an intuition-first walkthrough focused on linked list fundamentals.
Given the head of a sorted linked list, delete all duplicates such that each element appears only once. Return the linked list sorted as well.
Example 1:
Input: head = [1,1,2] Output: [1,2]
Example 2:
Input: head = [1,1,2,3,3] Output: [1,2,3]
Constraints:
[0, 300].-100 <= Node.val <= 100Problem summary: Given the head of a sorted linked list, delete all duplicates such that each element appears only once. Return the linked list sorted as well.
Start with the most direct exhaustive search. That gives a correctness anchor before optimizing.
Pattern signal: Linked List
[1,1,2]
[1,1,2,3,3]
remove-duplicates-from-sorted-list-ii)remove-duplicates-from-an-unsorted-linked-list)/**
* Definition for singly-linked list.
* public class ListNode {
* int val;
* ListNode next;
* ListNode() {}
* ListNode(int val) { this.val = val; }
* ListNode(int val, ListNode next) { this.val = val; this.next = next; }
* }
*/
class Solution {
public ListNode deleteDuplicates(ListNode head) {
ListNode cur = head;
while (cur != null && cur.next != null) {
if (cur.val == cur.next.val) cur.next = cur.next.next;
else cur = cur.next;
}
return head;
}
}
/**
* type ListNode struct {
* Val int
* Next *ListNode
* }
*/
func deleteDuplicates(head *ListNode) *ListNode {
cur := head
for cur != nil && cur.Next != nil {
if cur.Val == cur.Next.Val {
cur.Next = cur.Next.Next
} else {
cur = cur.Next
}
}
return head
}
# Definition for singly-linked list.
# class ListNode:
# def __init__(self, val=0, next=None):
# self.val = val
# self.next = next
class Solution:
def deleteDuplicates(self, head: Optional[ListNode]) -> Optional[ListNode]:
cur = head
while cur and cur.next:
if cur.val == cur.next.val:
cur.next = cur.next.next
else:
cur = cur.next
return head
/**
* Definition for singly-linked list.
* #[derive(PartialEq, Eq, Clone, Debug)]
* pub struct ListNode {
* pub val: i32,
* pub next: Option<Box<ListNode>>
* }
* impl ListNode {
* #[inline]
* fn new(val: i32) -> Self {
* ListNode { next: None, val }
* }
* }
*/
impl Solution {
pub fn delete_duplicates(head: Option<Box<ListNode>>) -> Option<Box<ListNode>> {
let mut vals = Vec::new();
let mut cur = head;
while let Some(mut node) = cur {
vals.push(node.val);
cur = node.next.take();
}
let mut kept = Vec::new();
for v in vals {
if kept.last().copied() != Some(v) {
kept.push(v);
}
}
let mut out: Option<Box<ListNode>> = None;
for &v in kept.iter().rev() {
out = Some(Box::new(ListNode { val: v, next: out }));
}
out
}
}
/**
* Definition for singly-linked list.
* class ListNode {
* val: number
* next: ListNode | null
* constructor(val?: number, next?: ListNode | null) {
* this.val = (val===undefined ? 0 : val)
* this.next = (next===undefined ? null : next)
* }
* }
*/
function deleteDuplicates(head: ListNode | null): ListNode | null {
let cur = head;
while (cur && cur.next) {
if (cur.val === cur.next.val) cur.next = cur.next.next;
else cur = cur.next;
}
return head;
}
Use this to step through a reusable interview workflow for this problem.
Copy all n nodes into an array (O(n) time and space), then use array indexing for random access. Operations like reversal or middle-finding become trivial with indices, but the O(n) extra space defeats the purpose of using a linked list.
Most linked list operations traverse the list once (O(n)) and re-wire pointers in-place (O(1) extra space). The brute force often copies nodes to an array to enable random access, costing O(n) space. In-place pointer manipulation eliminates that.
Review these before coding to avoid predictable interview regressions.
Wrong move: Pointer updates overwrite references before they are saved.
Usually fails on: List becomes disconnected mid-operation.
Fix: Store next pointers first and use a dummy head for safer joins.