For an array A where:

 

Position A[0] = x

Position A[1]  = y

Position A[2] = z

 

And an empty array B with size 3.

 

Array B after your method:

 

Position B[2] = A[2]

Position B[1] = A[1]

Position B[0] = A[0]

 

->

 

B[0] = A[0] = x

B[1] = A[1] = y

B[2] = B[2] = z

 

A = B 

 

Is that actually necessary?

I was under the impression that they wanted to generate a path that was simply progressing in the opposite direction.

Is that actually necessary?

I was under the impression that they wanted to generate a path that was simply progressing in the opposite direction.

 

I don't think you understand what we are saying.  Your method literally just returns the exact same order of the path that you pass to it. No change what so ever.

I don't think you understand what we are saying.  Your method literally just returns the exact same order of the path that you pass to it. No change what so ever.

 

Huh, looks like I spaced out there.

I fixed the method I provided, it works now.

Huh, looks like I spaced out there.

I fixed the method I provided, it works now.

 

Still is an inefficient way to do it, but it should work now at least. :p

Still is an inefficient way to do it, but it should work now at least.

 

He asked how, not how to do it the most efficiently.

public <T> void reverse(T[] array) {

for(int i = 0; i < array.length >> 1; i++) {

T tmp = array;

array = array[array.length - 1 - i];

array[array.length - 1 - i] = tmp;

}

}

public <T> void reverse(T[] array) {
	for(int i = 0; i < array.length >> 1; i++) {
		T tmp = array[i];
		array[i] = array[array.length - 1 - i];
		array[array.length - 1 - i] = tmp;
	}
}

 

Any reason why you use a generic instead of an object parameter?

Is it a casting thing?

public <T> void reverse(T[] array) {
	for(int i = 0; i < array.length >> 1; i++) {
		T tmp = array[i];
		array[i] = array[array.length - 1 - i];
		array[array.length - 1 - i] = tmp;
	}
}

 

 

At least someone gets it :P

Any reason why you use a generic instead of an object parameter?

Is it a casting thing?

 

 

Because now the array can be of any type.

Look into:

Collections.reverse()

Why not this above? Convert your array into a list. With Arrays#asList(array) then use the Collections#reverse (list)

Edited February 9, 201510 yr by josedpay

 Convert your array into a list. 

 

If you have to convert it then its not going to be as efficient.

 

i.e. take more memory and time.

Edited February 9, 201510 yr by Mysteryy

so If I wanted to walk to some location, and also walk from that location to my starting location, I would need to set up two paths?

so If I wanted to walk to some location, and also walk from that location to my starting location, I would need to set up two paths?

 

Hey man, the reason there was a discussion on reversing a path was that you can use a path to get somewhere and then simply reverse it to return