During technical interviews it is common for your interviewer to ask you to solve coding challenges. And you should have a good understanding of graph algorithms if you want to do well on these challenges.

We just published a course on the freeCodeCamp.org YouTube channel that will teach you about graph algorithms and how to use them to solve coding challenges.

Alvin Zablan created this course. Alvin's dynamic programming course is one of the most popular courses on the freeCodeCamp channel, and now he's back to teach you about graph algorithms.

Here are the topics and algorithms covered in this course:

- graph basics
- depth first and breadth first traversal
- has path
- undirected path
- connected components count
- largest component
- shortest path
- island count
- minimum island

Watch the full course below or on the freeCodeCamp.org YouTube channel (2-hour watch).

## Transcript

(autogenerated)

This course will help you learn what you need to implement graph algorithms and use them to solve coding challenges.

Alvin's dynamic programming course is one of the most popular courses on our channel.

And now he's back to teach you graph algorithms.

Hey, programmers, I'm Alvin from Structy.

Welcome to our course on graphs.

And in particular, this is going to be about graphs for your technical interviews.

Of course, graphs are a very common topic when it comes to those technical interviews.

And in particular, what I want to emphasize throughout this course, is the handful of patterns that come up time and time again, on those technical interviews.

in just about two and a half hours, I'm going to give you all the tools you need to basically cover I'd say about 80% of all graph problems.

And so what I have in store for this course, well, I think the key to victory for your data structures and algorithms, and especially your graphs is to visualize things, right.

So we're going to do is trace through a lot of different algorithms, and be sure to understand them at a high level.

And that means going through different animations here, I think graphs have a pretty bad rap for being a difficult topic.

Because to a beginner, you can have very, very different narratives around a problem, and not really understand.

They're all really based on a graph premise.

So we're going to realize that a bunch of different things can be understood as graphs.

So when it comes to the prerequisites of this course, I'm going to assume that you know nothing about graphs.

But you do know how to code, right, so I'm going to have the expectation that you understand some recursion.

So as you work through the course, and learn about different graph patterns, we're going to use those patterns to solve some very classic interview problems about graphs, right.

And I'm going to give you plenty of opportunity to practice these patterns in different problems that we will be ready whenever you have them on a technical interview.

What I love about the topic of graphs is just using a handful of different algorithms, you can cover the majority of graph problems, right.

For every graph problem that we cover, we're going to split it up into two sections, section one is going to be about the approach for the video.

So we're going to go over the strategy and overall theory, and be sure to sketch out a nice meaningful picture.

We're also going to talk about the complexity of the algorithm in the approach video.

Following every approach, we're also going to implement the code of course, I'm going to be writing all of my code in JavaScript, you'll be able to follow along in any language that you like.

So that means occasionally I'll be switching to my code editor where you of course can follow along.

We're also going to be sure provide links in description as well as links on screen.

That way you can formerly you read the prompts for every problem, as well as look at the different test cases.

Alright, I think that's enough introduction.

For now, let's hop right into the course.

Alright, programmers.

So let's jump right into the course, I want to start by giving you some background about your graphs, we're going to go over the graph basics that you need to start attacking problems in a technical interview.

So first off, what is a graph? A graph is really just a collection of nodes and edges.

So with respect to nodes, you can visualize them as typically just some circles with some data inside of them.

So I'll put some letter values in my nodes over here.

And when we refer to edges, that would be just any connections between nodes.

So for example, if there was a connection between A and C, it would look something like this, right? What I can formally say is there's an edge between A and C, I can create many edges between any nodes I want within this graph.

Another word you might hear out in the wild when it comes to describing nodes, as you might hear the word vertex being used, right, they're really the same thing.

In this course, I'll stick to the word node.

And an edge is just a connection between a pair of nodes.

And that's really all a graph is at a high level, where things get interesting is how we can use this graph framework to actually solve a problem, right.

So if you think of these nodes as just things and the edges as relationships, a graph is grid describing the relationship between things.

For example, we can say that the nodes here are cities and edges would be roads connecting cities are in a similar way, maybe our nodes here are courses, and then the edges represent prerequisites.

And so in the future, we're going to use graphs as a way to illustrate and frame some narrative problem.

Let's talk about this graph.

In particular, here, I really have drawn a directed graph.

And that's because I have some arrowheads along the edges.

That would be a comparison to an undirected graph.

So here, I have really the same structure, except I don't have any arrowheads on the edges here.

And that means that there is no directionality to it right.

If I look at the directed graph, let's say I was at the node A, well, then I can travel to B or C, let's say I move to C.

However, once I'm at C, I cannot travel to a, I can only travel to E, right? That's because I have to obey the direction of the arrow heads here.

By take a look at my undirected graph, let's say I was currently situated at the scene over here, that I do have the option of traveling to either a or E, right? So if I traveled to a, that's all good, I can even travel back to C.

So think of as an undirected graph as a two way street.

For now we'll just continue on with our directed version.

Let me also introduce some useful terminology we can use when talking about the nodes in our graph.

If I was currently situated at this a node, I can refer to B and C as neighbor nodes.

Alright, so a neighbor node is really any know that's accessible through an edge, of course, obeying the direction of the edge.

In other words, if I was currently situated at the sea node, that I only have one neighbor of E, right, if I'm at the sea, you know, then I won't consider a neighbor.

Awesome.

When you visualize graph algorithms, you should really sketch a picture that looks just like this, right literally drop nodes as circles and arrows as your edges here.

However, when it comes to how we implement this algorithm in some code, we're gonna have to represent it in a more programmatic way.

Right? So in my brain, I think of this image of like nodes and arrows between them.

However, in my program, I'm going to use typically an adjacency list, it's probably our preferred way to represent and graph information, right.

So depending on the programming language of choice we're going to use typically, we would use some hash map data structure to represent an adjacency list.

Really, we're looking forward to using some constant time, I'll look up data structure that has a key value pair mapping, right.

So if you're in JavaScript, they'll be an object, if you're in Python, they'll be a dictionary.

If you're in a language like Java, or C, you'll be using an unordered map.

Looking at this hash map, I have drawn or this adjacency list, the keys of this adjacency list are going to be every node in my graph, right, so I just have all of the node values A through F laid out as the keys.

However, if you look at the corresponding values, the values are actually going to be an array, right? So if I look at this very first entry, it says that I have a node of a and then in the array of populated all of the neighbors have a that is a has two neighbors have BNC.

That's why I have this correspondence within my adjacency list.

That holds true for every entry within my adjacency lists.

So for example, let's say look at the entry for e.

So I go to the spot and make j c list where the key is E, it only has a one outgoing edge to be.

That's why the array for he only has be inside of it.

One thing to also note is even if a node has no neighbors, it should still appear as a key within my adjacency list.

For example, if you look at the D, node D has no outgoing edges.

That's why its neighbor array is empty.

However, it should still at least appear as a key within my adjacency lists, right, that way, you can still know that the D node exists.

So at the start of the course, will usually be taking in adjacency list as the information to represent a graph, right.

But as we sketch through things on the whiteboard, we should be visualizing them using a nice picture like this.

Awesome.

So let's actually jump into our first pair of algorithms.

To me, the must know algorithm for a graph is really going to be to do some sort of traversal on it.

Why don't we start by talking about a depth first traversal, something you may have heard of before, right, now we're going to talk about the depth first traversal algorithm that operates on a graph.

So let's start by understanding at a high level what order a depth first traversal would give you.

So let's say I had some starting node, and I'm gonna choose a as my starting node, right, so I'm gonna color it here in yellow.

If I was following a depth first traversal.

Now that I've, you know, chosen as my starting point, I can either hit B or C.

Next, I'm just gonna commit to using B.

So let's say I had the sequence so far have a comma b.

And at this point, if I was truly following a depth first traversal, I must go deeper to the D node.

In other words, I don't go to the C node yet.

Cool, that would be a true depth first traversal, right.

At this point, now that I've bottomed out at D, D is a dead end, right? I can't travel to F from D, because that would be disobeying the arrowhead.

And so now I can move to that other neighbor of C.

And from here, the algorithm would continue, right, I go from C to E, and then e to B.

And technically, I would have to double traverse some nodes like B and D over here.

So overall, in this yellow coloring, I have colored the full region that a depth first traversal would explore starting at a notice that if you started at a it would be impossible to reach F.

And that's kind of normal, right? That's kind of why we use these traversal algorithms that can tell you whether or not you can travel between some nodes.

And we'll see that literal problem later on.

Right? So you're probably wondering, you know, exactly how do we implement this, but for now, I just want to stay focused on the order that we got, right.

So just regarding our depth first traversal, we remember the first three iterations of the algorithm, we hit the sequence of a B, D, right, that's indicative of a depth first traversal.

Now let's compare that to the breadth first Marion.

So I'm going to lay down the same exact graph, we're also going to start a traversal at the a node, but this time follow a breadth first order.

So I have a first and let's say, you know, I chose B as my next node when it comes to breadth first traversal.

It doesn't matter like which, you know, initial neighbor you choose, so I'm just gonna choose B.

But now that I've chosen B, if I was following a true breadth first traversal, I must hit c next, right.

And that's the main difference between our depth first and breadth first reversals for the same graph, my depth first would start a B, D, whereas my breadth first would start a, b, c.

And so you're probably wondering, is there any importance between this nuance right? When would I prefer depth first over breadth first, or vice versa? Either a depth first or breadth first traversal would explore the same exact nodes within a graph.

However, it would explore them in a different order, right? And this is more obvious to see when we have a larger graph with way more edges.

And so let's look at how he depth first traversal explores again, but this time on a much larger graph, let's take a look at this one.

So I'm going to choose some random node as a starting point, let's say I chose this node in yellow, that was doing a depth first traversal, what I'm going to do is, you know, pick a direction and travel in that same direction as far as possible before switching directions.

So let's say I move to the right, at this point, I would have to continue moving toward the right, until I can't move to the right any longer, at which point, I have to choose some new directions, let's say it was downward.

I'll keep doing that until I can't move downward anymore.

And so I'd have to move to the left now, now I'd keep chasing this single path in a very deep direction.

So that's behavior indicative of a depth first traversal, right, you're exploring one direction as far as possible before switching directions.

Let's compare that to a breadth first traversal.

So let's say start at the same node in pink, if I was following a breadth first traversal, it would look something like this.

From the starting point, I would explore all of the immediate neighbors of this node, kind of in a circle like this.

Now I just keep applying that behavior.

So as you notice about the breadth first traversal, is it'll tend to explore you know, all directions evenly, right, instead of just favoring One Direction all the way through.

That's really the only difference between a depth first and breadth first traversal.

Later on the course, I'll bring up explicit problems where you might prefer one over the other.

All right, but for now, what I want to do is give you all the background you need.

So you can actually build this algorithm will kind of talk about things at a high level, consider this the pseudocode, then, of course, we'll express it in some JavaScript code later on.

So when it comes to actually implementing in code, these two algorithms, the key is to understand that a depth first traversal uses a stack, and a breadth first traversal uses a queue, recall that a stack is something where you add to the top and remove from the top as well, or is it Q is something where you add to the back and remove from the front, and it gives you two very different orderings.

That's really the only difference between these two algorithms.

So let's start by tracing through our depth first traversal, of course, using a stack, so I'm going to use a slightly different graph.

And to visualize my stack, I'm going to use this bar to represent the bottom of my stack, obviously, for me, at least I think of a stack as some vertical data structure.

Cool.

So let's say I just arbitrarily chose a as my starting node to perform my depth first traversal, right, in the long run, just want to print out all different node values within this graph.

So what I'm gonna do is I'm gonna take my starting node of a, and I'm just gonna immediately initialize it onto my stack.

So right now as the only thing on my stack, it's also at the top of my stack.

And now I can enter the flow of the main algorithm here, because I have a stack, what I can only do is remove the top of my stack.

So that means I pop off a from the stack, and consider the a node, my current node being looked at, right? At this point, let's say I print out a to my console.

And from here, what I want to do is consider A's neighbors, right.

So if I look at the C node, what I should do is just push c to the stack, then also push B to the stack, right.

And it doesn't matter like in which order you push these neighbors.

If I want it to hit B first, then I'm going to push them second, right? Awesome.

That would end like my first iteration of this depth first traversal.

Cool.

So at this point, I can look at my stack, and my stack still has some data on it.

So I should do is again, pop the top of my stack.

So I'm going to pop and be off my stack.

And that becomes my current, I'm also going to print it out.

At this point, I look at B's neighbors, B has one neighbor of D and so I push d to the top of the stack.

Notice that because I have a stack D ends up on top of the C, right.

And so now when I get to another iteration, when I pop the top of my stack, I look at the D node as my current, right, and I can print out D.

And this feels good because so far, my print order would be a BD, notice that I kind of pursued that single path deeply following a BD.

But I have to look at DS neighbors, I can take f and just push f to the top of my stack.

next iteration, my stack is still on empty.

So I should do is pop the top F is now my current, I can print out F, but f has no neighbors.

So F isn't going to push anything else to the top of the stack.

Right? At this point, I get to this next pass, and I pop the top of my stack.

And that means C is now my current, I can print out CS value.

And then I can look at Sue's neighbors.

And I just push e to the top of my stack.

On this last iteration, I popped up on my stack, he is now my current I print out he since he has no neighbors, I don't push anything else to the top of my stack.

And at this point, I've reached the state where my stack is empty.

And that means my algorithm is done right that means you explored as far as possible within your graph.

Notice that it might not necessarily be the case that you're able to hit every node of the graph.

And this particular example it was possible though, awesome.

So let's redo that trace using Our breadth first algorithm, which means we just adjust things slightly.

And we use a queue order.

Remember that a queue is a first in first out data structure, meaning things enter to the back, and then they leave from the front.

And so let's say I use this arrow to represent the directionality of my queue, right.

And I start the algorithm in the same way for my breadth first traversal.

Let's say I want it to begin at node A.

So I just initialize my queue with a cool, so I start by removing the front of my queue.

So a becomes my current node, I can print out a as well.

And now I consider A's neighbors, right.

So I consider B and C.

If I wanted to travel to B before C, then I should push B to my queue first, right, so I add B to the back of my queue, right.

And I should also add c to the back of my queue, right.

And that would actually end my first iteration.

So now I look at my queue still has some stuff on it.

So I removed the front of my queue, that means B becomes my current.

Of course, I print out B.

Now I consider B's neighbors.

So I just look at the D node, and I push d to the back of the queue, since D enters through the back and ends up behind the C, and that's really important behavior.

next iteration, I removed the front of my queue.

So my current is now see, right, I can print out see, and then look at sees neighbors of just E and I add e to the back of the queue, which means that in the order of my queue, he ends up behind the my next iteration, I removed D from the queue, and I print out the edits neighbor of F to the back of my queue.

next iteration, I removed e from the front of my queue, print it out.

Since he has no neighbors, he is not going to add anything else to the back of the queue.

And of course, finally, f leaves the front of my queue, I print out F, F has no neighbors, at which point now my queue is totally empty.

And since our queue is empty, that would be the end of our algorithm.

Alright, and that's all there is to our depth first and breadth first algorithms, they're going to be the nice baseline code that we use to solve many different graph problems.

I think that's enough theory.

For now, what I want to do is now switch to my code editor, where you can actually implement these in JavaScript, hey, programmers, here I am in my editor, what I want to do is now show you how to implement those depth first and breadth first algorithms.

So we'll start with the depth first.

And my goal is really just to build a function that will print out all of my values in the graph, according to a depth first traversal, right, we're going to define this function depth first print, making an arrow function in JavaScript, it's going to take in the graph, which is going to be given as a nice adjacency list.

And this is actually the same graph.

Now last example we traced out, I'm also going to need to specify some starting node here, I'll call it a source node, we're going to begin the traversal.

Starting at that node.

Cool.

And so we know inherent to a depth first traversal is going to be a stack.

So I'll show you how to implement this iteratively, which means you need an explicit stack.

For me in JavaScript, that's as simple as just using a JavaScript array, right? I'll make it empty at the start.

And I can use this array as a stack, if I just commit to using operations that manipulate the same end of the array.

In other words, if I just use push and pop, that will always manipulate the end of the array, right? removing and adding to the end of that array.

What I want to actually be sure to do is I want to initialize the stack with my starting node, that is with my source node.

Remember that like a node here is really just designated by some character.

Cool.

And when it comes to designing like the main loop for the algorithm here, do you want to keep running the algorithm while the stack is not empty? In other words, wall stack dot length is bigger than zero, that I have to keep running.

That's very reminiscent to what we expressed on the whiteboard.

So when it comes to performing like a single iteration of this depth first, what I want to do is remove the top of my stack.

So if I do stack dot pop, that will remove the last item of an array, in this case like the top of my stack, and also return it to me.

So I'm going to save that to a variable, I'll call it my current.

And so this point would actually be a great opportunity to just print out that current.

So I'll console dot log current, right? So looking at, you know, this example over here, since I initialize a stack to contain just the source note of a, on the very first iteration, this while loop, I would of course, pop out a, then I would print it out, right.

And from that point, what I want to do is consider A's neighbors of B and C.

So if I want to look at like the array associated with a, I can just key into my graph, right, cuz my graph is an object right now.

So if I say graph, square bracket, current, right, if current is a, that means graph, square bracket current would give me back this array.

I want to iterate through every node or every neighbor in that array.

So I'm going to nest a loop here.

And I say for let neighbor of that array.

So if you're familiar in JavaScript, if you just use a for of loop, they'll iterate an order through an array.

So now I'm hitting a neighbor as B and neighbors see.

What I want to do with those neighbors is simply Push them to the top of my stack.

So that will just be stacked up, push and push this neighbor.

Awesome, I'm going to be sure to push every single neighbor that has.

So sometimes I'll have two neighbors.

Other times I'll have one neighbor, or even no neighbors.

That's really all there is to implementing a nice baseline depth first print.

Something that I do want to point out, my favorite way to implement this algorithm is to consider like processing your node, when it leaves the stack, not when it enters the stack.

In other words, I usually write like my print statement, right after something is popped.

And the thing that I pop is exactly what I print.

Right.

So let's go ahead and give this a run, see what we get.

It looks like in my terminal, I got the order of AC e b df, which you'll notice is slightly different from what I expected from over here.

However, this would be also a valid depth first traversal, we have to bear in mind is you know, depending on like the arbitrary order of values within the same neighbor's array, you could tend a different direction at first, right? Most important thing I look for when it comes to verifying a depth first is to make sure that I you know, chase the same direction before switching directions, right.

So since I started out with a C, so I go a and then to a C over here, the next move would be going to E and that's exactly what happened in my code, right.

And then once I hit E is actually a dead end.

So then I can go on to my other lateral neighbor like B, right.

And so I can contrive the same order expected here, if I just flipped this right.

And so I put c followed by B.

I'll give that around.

They're both valid.

depth first traversals.

See what we got now.

Cool, now I get the exact order of A, B, D, F, C.

And really think about why that is, right.

So let's say that I just popped out a from my stack.

So I printed out a that's nothing fancy, right.

And then from there, I start iterating through the array that's associated with a right, so on the first iteration, I iterate through C, right? If I push C on the stack, let's say this is the bottom my stack, by pushing on the stack, it's right here.

Then followed by that I pushed B on the stack.

Now B is on top.

Since B is on top, I know like the next top level iteration, this while loop, I would remove B and that's going to be the next note I visit.

And so they're really both depth for sure Russell's.

Nice.

So two things to note, you're definitely going to use a stack to implement depth reversal.

And you can use the stack in a few different ways.

Right? So here I'm using like an explicit like array as a stack.

And I'm implementing this using some iterative code, right.

So using a few loops, right, what you can also do is implement depth first recursively, because I know any recursion uses the underlying call stack.

So let me show you how to implement that as well.

And when it comes to, you know, having all these different tools in your arsenal, I would definitely practice both the iterative and recursive flavors.

We'll see that later on in this course.

So let's say I wanted to solve the same problem.

But now recursively, it's actually going to be less code.

So I'm going to have the same sort of arguments, I'm going to have the graph which is the adjacency list as well as a source node, consider like the source node as like your current location.

So if I'm at some node, maybe the first thing I should do is just print out myself, right, print out this node, so I'll do is console dot log, this source node.

And that feels good just from the get because when we actually do a top level call to this recursive function, they're passing in a as the source node.

So I do want to begin a as a first note in my print, and then from there, I need to look at AES neighbors.

Well, if you want to look at as neighbors like before, just key into the graph, adjacency list using that node, right, and this would give me an array of CNB.

Now I just iterate through that array.

So I'll say for let neighbor of that array.

And at this point, what I want to do is now do the recursion, right, so I make a recursive call on each of these neighbors.

So for me, that means just called depth first print, you give the same graph, right, the graph object doesn't change, but you should change like the source node.

Now you want to pass in that neighbor as the source node.

And you're going to make a recursive call for every neighbor in that array.

And this would actually be all we need.

Let's go ahead and just run this version.

divider run over here.

Looks like now we get the order AC E, B, D, F.

And that's really again, another type of depth first print, right, not exactly this order, because this time we chased c first, right, we went a C, I want to get exactly this ordering and my recursion, then I would have to put in B first, really same sort of pattern.

Now let's get that into the run.

Good AB de FC.

One thing I want to bring up about this recursive first is it has no explicit base case, meaning there's no obvious like, if statement that just like returns like you'd typically see in most recursion.

That's because in this problem I have an implicit base case when a node like he is a dead end.

All right, let's say my current source coming in is he, well, then when I iterate in this for loop, I'm iterating through this empty array, I mean to have zero iterations.

If you have zero iterations, then you never make a recursive call.

Right? That's the same thing as having a base case, right? A base case is really just a scenario where we don't have a recursive call.

So that's how this code still works.

Alright, so now you know how to implement depth first in two ways, right, iterated and recursively.

And they both use definitely a stack.

Let me now show you how to implement your breadth first, right as well comment out some of this code.

Now we'll do a nice breath first, give myself some room over here.

So for a breadth first, we want to solve the swan iteratively.

And it's really only possible iteratively, right.

So I know a breadth first traversal demands a queue, if you try to like implement a breadth first traversal using some recursion, and under the hood, there's some stack data structure, that's going to fight against the queue order that you want, right? So for breadth first traversal, you're always typically going to be writing some iterative code.

So some loops, right? Let me define this, I'll say breadth first print, take in the full graph, adjacency list, as well as the source node, I want to initialize my queue.

With that source note, again, the queue here is just going to be an array in JavaScript.

So I'll say const q equals an array that begins with just the source node.

Awesome.

And I'm going to use this queue by just committing to two specific methods on my arrays in JavaScript.

So if I use array dot shift that removes the first element of an array.

If I do array dot push that adds to the last position of an Array.

And using those two methods in combination would give me a nice cue, right, add to one end and remove from the other end.

So like before, we're gonna have a while loop, we're gonna iterate while our queue is not empty.

And so while queue dot length is bigger than zero, nice.

And same thing as our iterative, you know, at first, you want to start by just removing the front of your queue.

So I'll say q dot shift, that will remove the first element as well as return it to me.

So I can save in a variable, I like to call it current, just like the whiteboard, right? And from there, maybe I'll print it out.

So console dot log, this current node.

And from here, just consider your neighbors, right.

So if I key into my graph, using this current node, that gives me an array of its neighbors, I want to loop through each of those neighbors.

So I can say four will say let neighbor of that array.

And for that neighbor, I want to add them to the back of my queue.

So for me, that would mean simply q dot push, I'm going to go ahead and push that neighbor.

Awesome.

So I remove from the front, and I add to the back.

So that looks pretty good.

Let's go ahead and give it a run.

And actually, before I do that, I'm going to change the order of this, put the CNB.

Again, doesn't really matter the relative order for neighbors, I just want this exact output, and we'll talk about why that is right.

Give that a run.

So I get ACB EDF just like I expected ACB EDF, right.

So let's say you're on the first iteration of this breadth first print, I know that I would have just removed a because I initialized a on the queue, right? So my current is a and I print out a and then from there, I start iterating through this array, right.

So on the first iteration, I have C, that means I put c into my queue, right? And then afterwards, I put B, if you put C and then B, that means C is at the front of the queue, which is why on the second iteration, I have C first, right? So that's how you can manipulate potentially the lateral order of a breadth first print.

Awesome.

That's all there is to this traversal algorithm, what I really want emphasizes, especially if you look at the apples to apples iterative code, you compare depth first or breadth first, it's almost identical code.

You're really just changing how you access items in your array, right? You either pop or push or you shift and push harder than that the whole like structure of this code is identical, right? All right.

So that's our introduction on depth first and breadth first for our graphs.

In the next section, we're going to start to solve a problem, right, which will be really fun.

I'm just utilizing this code as our baseline tool.

And then that section also promised that start doing the analysis for bego of these algorithms.

So let's jump back to that whiteboard.

Hey, programmers, welcome back, right, and let's go over the approach for this has path problem.

So in this problem, we're gonna take in an adjacency list representing a graph for this problem, and really all graph problems, you definitely want to visualize this one with a picture.

And so what we'll do is we'll interpret each key of this adjacency list as representing a distinct node.

And if I look at any particular list, I can see that this f node should point to G and I.

And they do tell us in this problem that I have a directed graph.

So I'm going to draw arrowheads on these edges here.

So F points to G, as well as f points tie.

And I'll create similar edges based on the information in the given graph.

So we end up with an image like this, until they tell us that this is a directed graph that explains the arrowheads, but they also tell us that this graph is a cyclic.

So if you're unfamiliar, a cyclic just means No cycles, that kind of begs the question, what is a cycle in a graph.

So a cycle would be a some path through nodes, where I can end up where I want started.

In other words, if I started at the a node over here that I can go to B, then from there, I can go to C, then back to a, and so on and so forth.

So if I did a traversal, on the Sigma graph, I would get an infinite loop.

And what they're saying is, our graph input is guaranteed to be directed.

So it has arrowheads, but also a cyclic, so we don't have to consider any infinite cycles here.

That being said, In this problem, we also want to take in not only the graph information, but also a source and destination node, we want to do is return true or false indicating whether or not we can travel from the source node to the destination node.

In other words, is there a path that exists between those two nodes? For this problem, you can use either a depth first or breadth first search to actually solve the problem here, I'll trace through in this approach video, just the depth first search.

But in the walkthrough, I'll be sure to code it up both ways.

So let's say started at my source node, I know that if I was doing a depth first traversal, I can either choose the IRG, let's say happen to choose to G next.

Now I have no choice, right? If I'm doing truly a depth first, I should go deeper to the H.

So then I hit this H.

And as I traverse through these different nodes, I need to ask myself if my current node is equal to my destination.

So far, that hasn't been true.

At this point, I bottomed out with my h node, I can't travel any deeper.

So now I can move laterally to a node like I, at this point from I can either move to a K or a G, let's say by luck, I just happen to go to the G, this would actually bring me down a path I've explored previously, which we can optimize later on, but wouldn't be too much of a big deal.

Eventually, if I continued this depth first search through the graph, I would end up at a node that matches my destination, at which point I can return true signifying that there must be some path from F to k, just doing a depth first search.

And as we do this depth first search, it's really important that you obey the directions of your arrows.

So I should never try to travel upstream.

So that was a scenario where we were able to find a path from source of destination.

That's why we return true.

Let's reset and say that now, I should return false.

Alright, so let's say my source was J.

So I start at J.

And I'm trying to get to my destination of F.

If I start a depth first traversal, here, sorry, my j node traveled to the AI node.

At this point, I can hit either the G, okay, let's say I happen to hit the k, this point of bottom now.

So now I can move to the G.

And then from there to the H.

And at this point, there's actually nowhere else I can go, right.

So if I finish my traversal through the graph, using either a depth first or breadth first and I never hit my destination, then I can just return false, right? It must be the case that there is no such path from my source to my destination.

When it comes to implementing the depth first and breadth first reversals on this graph, it's going to be exactly what we're used to, you can either use a stack and solve it recursively.

Or you can do it iteratively.

And use a queue in which case you'd be doing the breadth first traversal.

We talked about the complexity of this, let's say that n is the number of nodes of our graph, a common thing that you can also do with these graph problems is define e as the number of edges here and edges refers to a connection between two nodes, basically just the arrows.

So if we use these two terms of number nodes and number edges, we would have a time complexity of our V o of the number of edges as because we would have to travel through every single edge of our graph.

Here, the space complexity would be based on the number of nodes, right? If I solved it, recursively, or even iteratively, with some sort of a depth first stack, then the worst case, I would have to have every single node on the stack, right? Likewise, if I saw the eternity with a breadth first I would have every single node on the queue.

So that's just one way we can define the terms for analyzing the time and space of this graph.

Typically, for graph problems, another acceptable way to analyze the time and space of your algorithm is to just use a single variable and just define n as the number of nodes.

That's because if you say n is the number of nodes, then we can also say that n squared would be the number of edges, or that big O.

It's about the worst case.

So let's imagine the worst case graph.

Let's say I just had these nodes of ABC.

Well, if I wanted to create as many edges as possible, how would I just create a single edge? Well, an edge is just a connection between two nodes.

So you could just really draw an edge for every pair of nodes in your graph, something like this.

And that's why we can say that n squared is the number of edges of any particular graph.

And so if you just wanted to use n to define the complexity here, then you could say that your time is going to be O of n squared, and your space complexity would still be O of n.

Do know that these are both two valid ways for defining the complexity for a very typical graph problems.

That being said, I think this is pretty straightforward.

Let's hop into the walkthrough video while we're actually implement both a depth first and breadth first solution for these.

I'll see you there.

Hey, programmers, Alvin here, right now.

Let's go over Ah, JavaScript solution for this has path problem.

And so we'll jump right in, we're gonna start by solving this one using a depth first traversal, which I know requires some underlying stack data structure, I'll just implement that using recursion.

So I can leverage the call stack to get my ordering.

And so I'm gonna solve this recursively, I'm gonna consider my source argument as like my current position during the traversal.

And so I can have a base case in check.

All right, if my source is equal to my destination, that I must have found the thing I'm looking for.

So just return true.

This base case signifies that I found my destination.

So there must exist a path.

And so I return true, always paying attention to the type that they want us to return for this function.

Let's say it's not true, well, they need to keep looking.

So what I should do is consider my current node, which is source, consider its neighbors.

If I key into my adjacency list, I know that this is going to be an object.

So I key into it using my source, that would give me an array of all of its neighbors.

So for example, let's say it was staring at this one, if my current source was F, and I say graph square bracket, F, I would get back an array of gi.

So now I want to look through the neighbors, right? So I can see over here is turned us into a loop and say for that neighbor of those neighbors, I want to traverse to them, which means I call recursively.

Right call has path, keep your graph the same, but update your current position.

Now I'm going to be situated at the neighbor.

And the destination stays the same, right, always have the same goal to get to solving this one recursively.

So think about what type of this is going to return, I know it's going to give back Boolean, right, it's going to tell me whether or not there is some path between my neighbor and the destination, right.

So if there's some connecting point, or some connecting path between my neighbor and the destination, then I know that there must be some path from my source to the destination, because your source is definitely next to your neighbor, right.

So there would be a path between all of us.

And so what I'll do is, check if this recursive call returns true, I'll make it explicit here, maybe it's clear.

And so if there is some path through my neighbor to the destination, then I can return true, just pass that true upward.

Because once I find a path, you can just exit out and return that shoe all the way back to the top level of color.

But let's say that this call returned false, that means that there is no path through my neighbor to the destination.

But it couldn't be the case that some other neighbor is actually going to work out.

And so what I don't want to do is just say like else return false, you should be able to immediately catch that code like this as suspect because there's no point of having a for loop then right? If in either case, you're always going to return, then you're never going to have a second iteration of this for loop, right? So if I don't find a path through my neighbor, so if this call returns false, then that's okay.

Just continue on to the next iteration, and search through your other neighbor.

that begs the question, Where should we return false, needs to be after the for loop? So only after I searched through all of my neighbors, and I never find a winning path? Should I return false, and that'd be our nice depth first traversal.

Let's give that a test run.

Awesome.

There we have it.

One thing to bear in mind here, we are leveraging the assumptions in the problem, right, they tell us straight up that the graph is going to be given is a sick like, so there are no cycles.

So that's why in our code, we didn't really worry about getting trapped in an infinite loop.

In our upcoming problems, we'll have harder grass to actually deal with that sick case.

But for now, this is a good baseline solution.

While we're here, let's also do a reference solution, which you know, by now should be iterated, right, there's no way to do like a breadth first recursively.

And so I need to create my own queue.

So I can create a queue, kind of in a pinch, I always just use an array in JavaScript, I'm gonna initialize that queue with my source on it.

So I'm gonna refer to like source and destination, they're really nodes.

But in the context of like our problem, they're really just given us strings, but they represent nodes, right? So think about the information they represent.

I'm going to iterate while my queue is not empty.

So while q dot length is bigger than zero, should be familiar code, very similar to our tree algorithms.

And I start a single iteration of reference by removing the front of my queue.

So I can say q dot shift some of the front, I can call that my current node that I'm traversing through.

And now that something has left the queue, typically here is where I check, I can check.

All right, if a thing I just visited, if that is my destination, then I can just return true, right, I found the thing I'm looking for.

So there must be a path that connects my original source and my destination.

Nice.

But let's say this was not true.

Well, then I need to consider its neighbors.

So like before, look at the neighbors just key into your graph using the source like it's a graph, square bracket source.

That gives me an array of all of the neighbors, all the neighbor nodes.

That's what I want to do here is iterate through every neighbor Over there.

And then I can just add them into my queue.

So q dot push that single neighbor, and do be sure to implement your true breadth first.

So you need to make things leave from one end of your queue, and you add to the other end.

So this codes looking good.

So you should realize how similar This is to our old like binary tree breadth first, except now we have to account for the fact that we could have like a dynamic amount of neighbors here, not just dot left and dot, right.

So I'm just iterating through all those neighbors adding them, I need to wait to return false.

And you guessed it, the move is after you finish this entire while loop, if your cube becomes empty, then you must have explored as far as you could.

And if you never return true, and now you can return false, because it must be the case that there is no path between the original source and your target.

So let's give this a test run will have a very similar time and space complexity.

But this would be the code for all of my iterative fans.

So here I'm getting a little error.

Let's see what we did wrong here.

So it looks like I timed out here.

Let's see bug this one together, I had to guess that means I did something wrong getting trapped in an infinite loop.

This condition looks okay, right q dot length greater than zero.

And so here it is, must be the case that I'm not correctly iterating through the neighbors here, I just wrote source.

Instead, I need to say current, because now I'm doing this iteratively, right.

So whatever node has just left my queue, I consider that nodes neighbors and add them to be visited next through my queue.

So let's give that a test run.

honest mistake there.

Cool.

And there's our breadth first solution for this has path problem.

So what I want you to do is practice both the depth first and the breadth first, like you expect, we're going to do a lot of graph problems coming up.

And depending on you know what the problem is asking sometimes will prefer one type of algorithm over the other.

So it's really important that you practice both of these algorithms.

Now, all the problems are relatively easy.

So practice this, give it a shot on your own.

And I'll catch you in the next problem.

See you there.

Hey, programmers, Alvin here, right.

Now let's go over the approach for this undirected path problem.

So we'll jump right in.

In this problem, we're going to be given an edge list for a undirected graph.

So if I are familiar with the terminology here, really what we're saying is every pair and this edge list represents a connection between two nodes.

For example, if I look at the first edge, and the list, I see i comma j, that means that there's a edge or connection between i and j.

And since this is an undirected graph, not only can I directly travel from i to j, but I can of course, move from j to i.

So it really represents a connection in both directions.

And so as we start to attack, this problem we'll want to do is actually convert this edulis into a more favorable format, like an adjacency list.

That's because typically, when we perform our traversal algorithms, they work best on an adjacency list form.

So let's start by doing that conversion here.

And I'll actually be pretty easy to code up.

So I want to basically generate a graph where I have nodes as keys, I want them to point to a an array of their neighbors.

For example, if I wanted to convert the first edge into an adjacency list form, what I can do is create keys for i and j.

Now that I is a neighbor of J, and also j is a neighbor of I, so I'm going to populate those neighbors respectively.

Now just follow this process for another edge.

So if I look at the edge, k comma i, I need to create a new key for K.

And I'm going to populate that with I and then for the existing key of I, I just add k into that collection.

So do bear in mind, the most important thing about this conversion is because we know that the graph is going to be undirected, whenever you put a connection within your graph, make sure that you have the inverse connection.

So if I have an edge from k to AI, they also need to have information for it.

Okay.

And this process would just continue for the entire list of edges.

And by the end of this conversion, we'll end up with an adjacency list just like this.

And now we're ready to perform our main algorithm.

When we go through the code walkthrough for this, I'll show you in depth how you can actually create this adjacency list.

And so when we want to actually come up with a traversal algorithm to solve a graph problem, it really helps if you actually visualize the shape of your graph.

So actually want to visualize this in terms of nodes and edges.

That means a bunch of circles and lines between them.

If you drew out a nice picture for this graph information, you would end up with a diagram like so.

And so we'll go through the rest of this approach video just referencing this diagram.

Something important I want to bring up at this point is for this graph, a very common case we'll have to handle is what if your graph has a cycle.

And that's especially true for your undirected graphs.

And so just for the purposes of this approach video, I'm going to add an additional edge just so we can talk about an explicit cycle.

So I'm going to add one new edge from k to J.

Cool.

The reason is now there's a nice big cycle of length three highlighting in red right now.

And this cycle is important to watch out for because if we don't do any special handling Then we may get trapped in an infinite traversal.

So imagine I started at this keynote, and next I moved to J, then I would move to i, and then back to k, and then back to J, and then I, and so on.

So now it gives me a cycle, we'll have to guard against that.

And so I can have a cycle of three nodes here, right, and you can really have a cycle of basically almost any size, as long as it's more than one.

So for example, if I took a look down here, notice that my graph actually contains technically like two separate islands, but we would consider them as just one giant graph, right? So I've got the small island of O and N, they actually form a trivial cycle, right? If I started traversal, at o.

From there, I can move to n.

And because I know that the edge between o and n is bi directional writes an undirected graph, that means I can travel back to O, and then back to n.

And this would give me cyclic behavior.

So have to watch out for all types of cycles in this problem.

So in the context of this problem, not only are we given a graph, we're also going to take in a two nodes.

So let's step through an example where I want to return true or false, is there a path between I and L.

So I'm going to mark those in my graph Israel.

So I'm going to start at the notify.

And to solve this one, you can use any type of traversal.

So either depth first or breadth first, I'll step through explicitly the depth first traversal.

Right.

Now, in order to avoid any infinite traversals, I want to mark my nodes as visited as I travel through them.

So not only do I situate myself at this source note of I, but I'm gonna mark it as visited.

And you can implement this like marking a visited pattern.

And a few different ways.

When we code this up later on, we're probably going to use a set to represent what we have visited.

But for now, I'll just check them off in my diagram.

And so in my diagram, if you see a checkmark next to a node, that means that I already have visited it.

So since I'm at this node of I want to move to its neighbors, so I'm gonna move to the neighbor of J.

And I'll also be sure to check it off as visited.

At this point, I can move to one of Jays neighbors, let's say I move to k.

And I'm also going to mark it as visited.

Now then Matt K, I can move to a few different neighbors, I could either move to I LRM.

Let's say by chance I chose I, I once I get to this, I know, I'm immediately going to be able to see that, oh, I visited this node previously.

So what I should do is not travel through it again.

Instead, I should go back to the K, right, because this eye node is already visited.

And that's where I actually avoid the infinite loop.

So instead, I moved to some of Kay's other neighbors, let's say I chose the L.

At this point, I would mark it as visited.

If I do a quick check, I can see that this note I'm at L is also my destination node.

So I must have just found a path between my source and the destination.

So at this point, if I find my destination, I can just return true, which was a pattern we spoke about in a previous problem, the only additional criteria we need is to mark nodes as visited.

That way, we don't get trapped in an infinite loop.

And that's only going to be needed if we have cycles in our graph, which if they don't give us any assumptions we should always guard against.

So let's take a look at another example.

Let's say I had a source of K.

And my destination was Oh, just looking visually in the graph, you can already see that there's no way to get from k to O, because they're disconnected, right, they're on separate islands both step through the algorithm regardless, so I'm going to start at K gonna mark it as visited, I'm going to visit some of Ks neighbors.

So I can move to i, then I can move to J.

And then at this point, I would move back to K and really make sure they don't explore any of Ks visited neighbors, so I don't move back to I right, instead, I should move to an unvisited neighbor, like l market is visited, then I only have one other node to visit, which would be this m node.

And at this point, I've actually exhausted this full graph region, right, there's nowhere else I can go.

And once I finished my traversal, if I never find my destination node, then I can just return false, right? It must be the case that there is no path that exists from my source node to the destination node.

That's really all there is to this algorithm.

Let's talk about the complexity.

If we say that n is a number of nodes, let's also define that he is a number of edges.

Like we said previously, this is something typically acceptable to do for our graph problems.

I know that the time complexity is going to be roughly of the number of edges.

And my space complexity is going to be O of n that is the number of nodes.

I think it's worth stepping through, you know what this complexity actually means, you know, big O refers to the worst case.

So let's think about a worst case graph that we can have.

And there are a few different graphs that you can kind of design and think of, I'll just show you one example.

So let's say I was given a graph like this, right? Notice that although z is kind of on its own island, all of these nodes that is a three as well as a C note.

They're all members of the same graph.

So let's say I wanted to figure out is there a path between A and z.

So if I did my traversal algorithm from here, I'll start at a then I move to B, and then to C, and then to D, and then to E.

At this point, I've covered all of the edges in the graph.

Remember that the edges are the arrowheads here, because I have to travel through every edge of this graph.

That's why we said the time complexity in the worst case is going to be o of E, right o of the number of edges.

and here we can say the space complexity is O of n.

Because if you're doing this with either a depth first stack, or a breadth first queue, in the worst case, you would have to add everything you visited, or that is all of the nodes onto your stack or queue.

That's why we say for regular graph traversal algorithms, we have a time complexity of o v, and a space complexity of O of n.

All right, I think we have the approach for this algorithm down pat.

At this point, I want to join me in the walkthrough videos, where we can actually see how to implement these visited patterns in some code.

I'll see you there.

Hey, programmers, Alan here, right.

Now let's go over a JavaScript solution for this undirected path problem.

So we'll jump right in, just like we said, in the approach video, there's going to be a two parter.

First, we're going to convert our edge list into an adjacency list.

That way, it's easier to do a classic traversal through it.

So I'm going to pretend I had a helper function here.

That gives me back an adjacency list.

I'll call it graph.

And I'm going to call this helper function, we'll say build graph.

And if I pass it, just all of my edges, I want it to do that conversion for me.

So let's work on that helper function right now.

And then we'll jump back to undirected path.

So I'll create my build graph function, just going to take in the edges, right.

And I know I want my adjacency list to be in the form of a plain old JavaScript object.

So create that graph object here.

And I'm going to return it by the end just like this.

And what I want to do is fill up this graph with information from the edges.

So I'm going to iterate through every edge.

So for let edge of edges, so iterating, through every single edge, I know a single edge would be a pair.

So I'm just gonna de structure out of that, maybe just my two node identifiers, we'll call them a and b, from the edge.

Nice.

What I want to do is now initialize these nodes as keys of this graph object.

So a would be something like this, I note or this k node, right.

So what I'll do is check if A is in my graph, I think really clean up this code, we better if I check if it's not in the graph.

So if the a node is not in the graph, then what I can do is initialize it in the graph.

So use it as a key and assign it to be an empty array.

And I'll do the same for B over here.

Right, so I'm initializing A and B in the graph if they don't exist, and once I do that, then I can safely just add neighbors into their their edges, right? So I can say, the graph square bracket a dot push B.

So now I'm saying that right, B should be a neighbor of a, but I know that this is an undirected graph, right? So that should be symmetric.

In other words, then make sure you push a into the neighbors of B.

So it's really important that you notice that this is an undirected graph.

So your adjacency list needs to be symmetric in that way.

So if a is in B's neighbors, B should also be an A's neighbors.

So that's looking pretty good.

Let's go ahead and see how that graph looks just with a little little side test here.

So I must steal maybe this snippet, get that full snippet here, I could just run it manually love to make sure I can test these little helper functions before I use them.

So we'll give this a run, we should just see the adjacency list form of these edges here.

See how it looks.

So that looks pretty good.

So I'm seeing that all right, I is connected to J and K.

Right? And that looks correct based on these edges.

Awesome.

And I'm also want to make sure that it's symmetric, right.

So if i and j are over here that I should have JNI over here as well, right, it should be a two way street.

Alright, now let's work in our real algorithm here, which would be some sort of traversal.

Now that you have a nice adjacency list, you can do either a breadth first or a depth first traversal.

I'm going to implement I think, a depth first.

Typically for me, it's just easier to raise push if I do it recursively.

And so I'm going to pretend I had a function called has path, it's going to take in my graph now.

And also a start node and an end node.

So I want to find a path from node A to node B, of course, I'm going to assume that this function returns a Boolean.

But of course, I have to write that function for myself.

So stay organized in our code, we'll say has path.

I'm going to take in the graph as well as node A and node B.

And I think a better name for these arguments as I'm doing this recursively.

Let's call this one source and this one destination.

So over time, we're going to call recursively and update this source node.

And that should be a familiar pattern to some other problems resolved.

Recently.

So think about my base case.

All right, I know that I've has successfully found a path when my source is equal to my destination node, if that's the case in return true, because I just found a path.

Otherwise, I have to keep looking.

So I should be able to look through the neighbors of my source node.

So I could say graph square brackets source, right? Remember that any point through this recursion source represents my current position.

If I say graph, square bracket source, let's say source was I, I'd be accessing all of ies neighbors, right? So I want to do is really iterates for let neighbor and, or rather have graph of source.

So if sources I on the first iteration neighbor would be j, second iteration neighbor might be K.

And for each of my neighbors, I want to travel to them.

So call has path, you can keep your graph argument the same needs to change your source though now you're situated at your neighbor, and your destination is fixed, or you're always trying to get to the same exact node.

I'm gonna think about what type this returns I know this is going to tell me Boolean, right? True or false? Is there some path from my neighbor to the destination, I'm going to check.

All right, if that call, returns true, I'll be explicit here, then I've just found a path.

So just return that true, right, pass it all the way back up.

And kind of the logic that we form here is, I know that by definition, source and neighbor are definitely connected.

So there's definitely a path between them.

They're connected by a direct edge.

So if my neighbor has a path to the destination, then I know, then the source also has a path to the destination.

Awesome.

And so after this for loop is done running, let's say we never find that any of our neighbors make a winning path, then means I finished this for loop without ever returning true, which means that I can return false right must be the case that this source node does not have some path to destination.

So I think we can go ahead and give this code a test run.

If you watch the approach video, you'll notice that there's something important missing from this code.

But we'll just run it and show you how to fish here.

So here I'm getting an error edges is not defined what I do horribly wrong, line 34 months ago, line 34 over here.

So got to take out this call, don't need that anymore.

That's on me.

Let's get that test run.

So that was not the error I was expecting.

I am expecting some sort of an infinite loop, though.

Perfect, I'm getting maximum call stack size exceeded.

So I got like an infinite recursion really.

And that's going to occur because we didn't account for the case where we have cycles in our graph, right, we need to avoid that.

Because if I have a cycle in my graph, I'm never going to hit any of these base cases, I'm just gonna keep traveling around in a circle.

And if that's unclear, make sure you watch the approach video, right.

And so like we said, the move here is to add some sort of data that shows where you've been previously.

Typically, the way we do this for our graph problems is to track some visited set.

So when I make my top level call to this house path, I know that that is the actual function that does that traversal, I'm going to pass along a new argument here.

And I'll make it a new JavaScript set.

So if you're unfamiliar with sets, and JavaScript, they're really just a collection of items.

And what's really great about a set is in o of one time, I can add something into the set.

And I can also check for something within the set is going to be very, very quick for our traversal.

I don't want to use something slow like an array, because to do a lookup or a check within an array, that would actually be O of n time, or it's for a set, it's o of one.

So I'm going to make a new argument here to receive a column visited.

What I want to do is all right check if my source node is already in the visited set to do that in JavaScript I can check visited out has.

So if the source node is inside of the visited set, then I could return false here, right, there's no reason to travel through this node anymore.

Because if it's an visited then I must have traveled at previously.

And this is how I can avoid an infinite recursion can also move this line downward if I wanted to.

And let's say that I make it through this if statement.

So that means that all right, this node source has not been visited.

But I'm visiting it right now.

So I need to do visit a dot add source.

So this expression checks if source is in visited, and this expression adds source to the visited set.

I want to change a few other details here.

Make sure that you pass along the same visited set through all of your recursive calls over here.

Because you want this visited set to be like global for the entire traversal right I need to know exactly where I've been in the past.

And once we have that in place, that should be everything we need to prevent any any cycles from giving us infinite recursion here.

Let's give it a test run.

Awesome.

There's a solution for our undirected path problem.

So important things to take away here do consider this problem, a two parter right? phase one is really straightforward, just converting an edge list into an adjacency list, which is actually an important skill to practice.

Because when it comes to, you know, some problems you'll face in the wild, they are all going to be basically graph problems.

But sometimes they'll give you the graph and like a different format, and you can always convert into a format that you're comfortable with.

And from there, we have a really core pattern of just doing a traversal through a graph, but also guarding against infinite loops, right.

And to do that, we just use some sort of a visited set.

Hey, programmers, welcome back right now want to go over the approach for this connected components count problem.

So in this problem we want to do is take an adjacency list representing an undirected graph.

As always, with any graph problem, you want to start by visualizing the actual graph.

And so if you took a picture of this information, it would end up looking like a graph with this structure.

The first thing we should notice about this visual graph is that a has multiple connected components.

So for example, I can look at this component in pink spanning just the one and two nodes, I can look at another component spanning the four or 5678 nodes.

And finally, a third component just covering the three node.

And that's why we say that your result for your function here should be three, right? Because there are three different connected components.

So let's come up with an algorithm we can use to count the components, we know that a general counting algorithm is going to use some variable, and we'll initialize that count variable to zero.

And the trick here is to use a combination of both some standard graph traversal code, maybe a depth first as well as some iterative code.

So I'll do along the left hand side is just list out all of my different nodes.

And what I'll do is start by iterating, through every node of this list.

And what I'm going to do is when I'm currently at some note of this iterative list, I'm going to start a traversal at that node.

So right now starting at the node of one, I begin, let's say a depth first traversal, you can really implement this pattern using either a depth first or breadth first.

So let's say I start at the one node over here.

What I should do now is continue this traversal as far as possible, that's the key to victory here.

So from this one node, I can move to a neighbor of two.

And of course, as I travel through these nodes, I want to make sure that I mark things as visited, so I can avoid loops.

And marking things as visited will also ensure that we don't double count any components here.

Once I hit that to note, I've actually completed this full component, there's nowhere else I can explore.

So at this point, I should increment my count by one.

So whenever I complete a new traversal on some region of the graph, I need to increment my count.

At this point, I now fall back to my iterative code on the left hand side, and I iterate through the next node.

So I now look at node number two.

If I take a look at node number two, I see that I already have it marked as visited.

So that means I don't need to start a traversal at that node.

So effectively skip the two and keep the count the same.

next iteration I have a three, three is unvisited right now.

So I should begin a new traversal starting at this three node, which means I just mark it as visited.

And since this three is a singleton node, right, it's not connected to anyone, I would actually complete their traversal, just on the three node.

At this point, I've completed a traversal.

So I increment my count by one.

So now I have a total count of two, I fall back to my iterative code.

So I moved from the three node to the four node.

And I see that this four node is unvisited, which again means I must begin a traversal from this four node.

And I'm going to expand this traversal.

Starting at four as far as I can, before I go back to my iterative code, right, so I'm going to explore the six, explore this five, explore the seven, and finally explore this eight.

At this point, I've completed a traversal.

So I can increment my count up to three.

And then I have to continue and fall back to my iterative code.

So look at the five node, I see that the five note is already marked as visited, so I don't start traversal.

And I see that the six node, same thing don't need to start traversal seven note already visited, eight nodes already visited.

At this point, I would be done with the entire algorithm.

And there's my final count of three.

So a few interesting mechanics here, right, you're going to need to definitely implement some code or some function that does a traversal through some component as far as possible, then you also need some iterative code just to potentially begin a traversal at every single starting point.

And what you want to do is be sure to mark nodes as visited as you traverse them, because only when you marked a new node as visited and complete that traversal should you increment your count.

You're probably wondering the exact details of how we implement this in some code, but don't worry, you'll realize that it's really just a spin off of our previous graph algorithms in the walkthrough video, but for now, we see that n is a number of nodes And he has a number of edges like usual, we know that this is really just traversing through the entire graph.

So we can say the time complexity is just o v, and the space complexity is O of n, right, depending on whether you do a breadth first or depth first, you're going to use that space, then in terms of your stack or cube.

And we can also consider using the space within our set if you use a set to mark your nodes as visited, but overall, it still will lead to a linear time and linear space solution.

Alright, I think I'm ready to code this one up.

I'll see you in the walkthrough video.

Hey, programmers, Alvin here, right, now let's go over a JavaScript solution for this connected components count problem.

And so we'll implement exactly the strategy we spoke about in the approach video.

So make sure you watch that first, we know that this is going to require really two different mechanisms are going to need our interactive code just to hop to different connected components.

And we also need some traversal code to just explore some single component as far as possible.

And so what I'll do here is let me start with the iterative code.

So I need to begin a traversal at every potential node.

So I can say for let node of my graph really say in my graph here, because for this problem we're given looks like JavaScript objects.

So if I say for let node in graph that would give me each of these keys like 015, and so on.

And so for every node of the graph, what I want to do is begin a traversal.

So we're going to assume I have a function here, I'll call it explore.

I'm gonna pass in, of course, the graph, as well as that node.

And what I want that function to do is do like a, we'll say, a depth first traversal, from that node as far as possible, right, so probably going to need to add more logic into this main function.

But for now, I think it's about time to actually flesh out explore.

So I'll choose to do this explore method recursively.

So we'll define explore, it's going to take in a graph, as well as my current node, I'll just call it current, right.

And then from there, I want to solve this one, using a depth first.

So recursion is fine.

And not much to do here, but really go through my neighbors want to iterate through every neighbor of this node.

So I can say like neighbor of graph of current, I recall that graph would be an adjacency list.

So if current is spread this out.

So if current was a node like eight, then on the first iteration neighbor would be zero, next iteration neighbor would be five.

So here, I'm just going through all the neighbors of my current node, I just need to not traverse to them.

So I can call explore, pass along the same graph, that doesn't change.

But now my new current node would be that neighbor, just like that, and this will perform the baseline of just the kind of depth first traversal.

But we need to also mark things as visited, like we said, in the approach video, that's a really important a part of the solution.

And I want this like visited set to be global for my entire traversal.

So I'm gonna have to create it, maybe my main function over here.

So I can create my constant visited, make it a JavaScript set, because JavaScript sets off for me O of one lookup, and o of one addition, I can pass this visited set my reference until all of these calls over here.

So I know I'm gonna receive visited over here now.

Now I want to actually start using visited.

So a few things to note, right, I definitely want to use visited to prevent cycles, right? That's one of the main reasons we always had visited to our graph traversals.

So some familiar code here.

If I've already visited this node, so if visited, has this current node, then nothing much to do here, maybe just return false.

Later on, we'll see.

The really cool trick we use here by returning false, right, actually serves two purposes.

return false because this might be a cycle.

And then I need to make sure that I pass as visited set along over here as well.

Nice.

And let's say that we have a current node that is not visited.

So this statement is false.

Well, then, it seems to be that we're visiting this node right now.

So now we should add it into the visited set.

Nice.

And then beyond that, we need to make sure that our explorer function is consistent in its type, right? So I'm going to have my explorer function do is it's going to return true whenever it explores like a new node return true.

So if you take a look at this code, for my function to hit this line 17 return true, then it must be the case that it has already finished exploring all of its neighbors, right, because I know that this for loop does the job of exploring all of the neighbors, right? So only after all of those neighbor calls returned.

Will I return true? And that must mean that I've explored this component as far as possible.

Right? And that seems good to go.

And what I can do is now in my main function, when I call explore it, now it's going to give me boolean data, right? If it's exploring a new island, or a new component, it's going to return true.

So I can check.

All right, if explorer returns true, then that's a new component.

So I can probably increment some count here, I should have created.

So I'll say 11, counts equals zero, I'm going to increment that count, when I find a new component and plus equals one by the end, I should of course, return that counts.

And what you'll notice is, for scenarios where we, let's say iterate into a node that we already explored, when I make this call, I know that that call is going to return false, because if something's already explored, it would have been added to visited.

So that's why I'm using some Boolean return values for this recursive function.

So that code is looking pretty good.

I think at this point, we might be ready to test this one, let's give it a shot here.

So some pretty tricky codes, not very long.

And this is a really core pattern here.

Looks like I'm getting an error, we have something wrong here.

So looks like the answer should have been two, but I gave back seven.

So I'm counting way too high.

So what I'll do to debug This one is really just maybe print out my visited.

So this is a very common mistake in JavaScript want to bring in, I think this example, I could test it manually.

What I want to be sure to do is maybe at every iteration of, let's say this this for loop, I console dot log with visited associate visited changes every time.

And I'll run this manually by just hitting run.

And let's see what we get here.

So a few things to note, it looks like some of our keys, or some of our items of the set are strings or the zeros a string.

And other times they're actually numbers, notice that they're missing quotes, that has to do with, you know, kind of just JavaScript objects, technically, keys of a JavaScript object are going to be always converted as strings, although the data within these arrays over here is going to be number.

And sets can actually store both types.

And so if you have like two different types, it's not gonna be able to figure out like that those really represent the same node.

For example, looking at this visited set over here, I have like the number one, as well as the string of one, which is no good.

So let's just convert them all to maybe strings.

So I'll check visited if it has the string version of my current node.

So I'll just do the conversion for me.

And likewise, I want to add the string version of the current node over here.

That way, I have very consistent types.

So let's run that manually, again, should just see all of our strings now.

Awesome.

And I think we can run all the test cases.

So that's a really important thing to watch out for in JavaScript.

And JavaScript is pretty unique in that regard.

It just automatically converts all of your keys into strings.

Awesome.

All right, programmers, it's all I got for this connected components count problem, what you want to do is really practice this problem.

It's actually a very, very common interview question.

And there are many variations of this problem that we're going to do in the future.

Hey, programmers, Alvin here, right? Now I want to go over an approach we can use for this largest component problem.

So in this problem, we're going to take in a graph, just like we've been doing as of late.

And the first thing you should probably do is think of this graph as a picture.

So hopefully, you drew it out.

So you can really understand what this is asking.

Our graph information is already given as an adjacency list.

So it's pretty easy to draw out.

So since I have a graph like this, the first thing I should notice is it could contain multiple components, right.

So here, I kind of see two separate islands, two separate components.

And I want to consider the sizes of each respective component.

So if I look at my first component, spanning the nodes, 015, and eight, I know that they have a size of four, they're the four represents the number of nodes within that component.

So I'm really interested in a number of nodes have a component, not necessarily the number of edges.

If I look at the other component that spans the nodes, two, three, and four, that definitely has a node group of three.

And this problem really cares about the largest component, so I should just return four, because it's the largest component size.

So when it comes to what this question is asking, you do have some familiar patterns if you've been following these problems in order and of course, I always recommend that you do these problems in order.

So how can we go about solving this one? Well, I know I'm gonna need some sort of iterative code that way I can travel and hop to different components or different islands, I can probably do some depth first traversal variation that also finds the size of a connected component.

So let's step through how this algorithm might run.

On the side.

I'm going to list out my nodes to represent how I'm going to do the iterations to be In a traversal at every node as my starting point, so I'm going to start at node zero.

And since node zero is unvisited right, now, I'm going to begin a brand new traversal, starting at node zero.

And I'm going to mark my nodes as visited as I go, because like usual for our undirected graphs, you want to watch out and prevent any cycles that you may get trapped in.

And I know that this depth first traversal, is going to explore this full region as far as possible.

And by the power of recursion, it'll be pretty easy to implement some pattern that can count every node as we traverse through it.

So I'm going to treat each of these nodes as just being a single note, of course.

And eventually, those ones are going to return to my top level call, in which case, I can add them all up, getting me a grand total of four.

If this feels very hand wavy, and you're wondering, like how the heck are we going to code up that pattern, don't worry, it's actually a pattern we've seen before.

And so I'll cover that in detail in the code.

Just know for now, it's actually not a big deal to get the count of nodes, right.

So now that I know that the size of this component is four, what I should do is I guess store it as my current largest island or component I've seen so far, because it's the first component that I've considered.

At this point, I should fall back to my intuitive code.

So I look at the node of one, what I should notice is this node one is already checked off, it's already visited.

So there's no reason to start another traversal from this node, because if it's visited, that means I have already explored the component that node one is a member of, so I can basically skip it, go on to node two in my iteration, since node two is unvisited, I should begin a new traversal.

Over here, I know that this depth first traversal is going to explore that component as far as possible, it's going to go ahead and count all of those nodes as one.

And eventually some of those counts together, giving me a count of three.

And so this next component has a size of three, I need to compare that three against my current largest four, obviously, the four is bigger, so the four gets to stay as the largest.

When I fall back to my iterative code, I get to my note of three threes already visited, so no reason to start anew.

traversal, four is already visited, so nothing to do, five is visited.

And of course, eight is visited as well.

At this point, we're done looking at every single node within our graph, and we must have explored every single component, so we can just return the final value that we have stored in that largest variable.

Awesome.

When it comes to the complexity of this algorithm, it's pretty straightforward.

It's basically exactly all of the algorithms we've seen so far, we see that n is the number of nodes and e is a number of edges, we know that the time complexity is going to be roughly o of the number of edges really just exploring through the entire graph, we can also see that the space complexity is also going to be linear, really just O of n.

Because through all of this, we're probably going to be storing all of our nodes in a set right to track visited.

And depending on how you implement your traversal algorithm, whether you use depth first or breadth first, you're also going to use a linear amount of space through your stack or your queue.

So overall, we're looking at a very efficient, linear solution.

And so with that, I think I'm ready to code this one up.

What I want you to do though, first is possibly give this one a shot on your own first cluster, really just utilizing some code that we've seen in the past.

So give it a go on your own.

If you get stuck, you can find me in the walkthrough video.

I'll see you there.

Hey, programmers, Alvin here, right now let's go over a JavaScript solution for this largest component problem.

So this problem is going to be really just a spin off of our last problem.

So we'll hop right into it.

And as always, make sure you watch the approach video first.

And we'll start by building our code that will help us start a traversal on disconnected islands here, right? This is connected components, we should say.

And so I'll start my iterating through every node of the graph, that means I just iterate through the keys of my input object here.

Because remember, we're given this graph as already an adjacency list.

So I can say for let node in the graph.

So I'll give me the nodes like 015, and so on.

And what I'll do is I'm going to start a traversal here, right? So we're going to pretend I had a function, I'll call it explore size.

And if I give it the graph information, as well as the node that I want to traverse through, hopefully, it actually does a traversal through that entire connected component, right.

And what I'm going to assume is, let me assume that this function actually returns the size of that entire component.

So that would be a number right, representing the number of nodes in that component.

And so if I have that should receive it here, call it size.

And I know I need some like max value logic for this entire for loop.

So I'm going to create longest, initialize it to zero.

And then from there, I can check.

All right, if the size of the component I just found, if it's bigger than the longest, then I can replace the longest simply longest equals size, that after the for loop, I would just read Turn the longest course I need to write this explore size function.

So I'll implement this as a type of depth first.

So I'm going to make it recursive, as for size, taking the graph, as well as our current node.

And a few things I should watch out for here, they tell us that we have an undirected graph.

And so we need to make sure that we avoid any cycles.

So we're also set up here is some classic structure, I'm going to use a visited set, we're going to use a set because it gives me O of one lookup and o of one insertion.

So now that I have my visited set, I can pass it along, as I start the traversals.

And now let's work on a base case, as well do to get going is check if I visited this node already.

So if the visited set already has this current node that I need to return, basically avoid a recursive call.

But I also want a consistent type here, right, so I'm assuming that this function gives back a number representing the size at some point in my traversal.

If I get to a node that has already been visited, that means I counted it already.

And so I'll treat it as zero right now, because I don't want to double count my nodes, right otherwise would be inaccurate here.

And now beyond that, what I can do is maybe create a variable here, I'll call it size, I'm going to set that equal to one to represent the current node I'm on right now, right? If this condition is not true, then it's the first time I'm seeing this node, so I need to count it.

And we'll also be sure to do is add it to visited that way I don't get into a cycle into the node later on.

Nice.

And at this point, I need to make my recursive call on the neighbors of this node.

So like we usually do could say for let neighbor of graph of node.

So remember your shape of data here.

So if node was a key, like five, when I say, Neighbor of graph node, that would iterate through the neighbors a five, zero, and then eight, and so on.

And so here, I make my recursive calls, I'm gonna call the same function explore sighs, pass along the same graph.

But now you're situated at your neighbor, and you can provide the same visited set.

And here's where I do my recursive leap of faith, right, I'm going to assume that this explore size function is working.

So if it was working, what would it give back, it would give me back a number representing the size of that graph, right beginning at my neighbor.

So whatever number I get back here, I just want to increment my size by that, right.

And that would accumulate a basically a count of all of the nodes in this fully connected component.

And after I'm done exploring my neighbors, I would have explored the entire component fully.

So I can just return my final answer, which would just be the size over here, really important thing you need to do is make sure if you follow this kind of strategy, you start your size equal to one, and you add to it over time, because this one represents the current node that I'm at, I know that every call is going to count its own node.

So over time, this will actually accumulate everything I need.

So feels pretty good, have our nice visited logic.

And we already wrote our main function here.

Notice how we're splitting up this code in a nice little helper function here, I think it's the best way to express this, it's very similar to some previous problems that we've done.

Right, I think at this point, let's go ahead and give this a shot.

See, what we get, should be able to put it through a few different test cases.

Nice.

And there, we have the largest component to problem.

So a few things, I want to draw your eye to remember that for your graph problems, or you have disconnected components, you're going to need not only your traversal code, but some just iterative mechanism, usually just a loop to make sure you can hop to different components, right? Because if you only had your regular like traversal function, by definition, there is no edge between separate components.

So you would never be able to explore the full graph.

Otherwise, alright, programmers practices, and I'll catch you in the next one.

Hey, programmers, Alvin here, right.

Now let's go over an approach we can use for the shortest path problem.

So here we have another graph problem, and your graph is going to be given as an edge list.

So the first thing we should probably do is, of course, visualize this graph.

And in the context of your code, it probably would be best if you convert it into an adjacency list.

Since we've seen that pattern a few times in some recent problems.

I'll leave that part to you.

But we're going to end up with a graph that looks like this.

And in this problem, we're also going to be given a two nodes here, let's say W and z, what I want to do is return the smallest path between these two nodes.

And here I have two obvious paths, right? One way I can get from W to z would be to go through x and y.

And there I can see that that path length would be three.

Do note here that we're going to consider the path link as the number of edges within the path.

So not the number of nodes, right? So that means how do I calculate three here? What's really just three lines, right, three edges.

That's one way to get from WC another obvious way to get from W to z would be to go through VI, which case, I would only need to use two edges.

So that path line is of course two.

And this problem, what I want to do is return the smallest possible path length.

So I should return the final answer of two here.

So we know that this problem is going to require us to do a graph pathfinding algorithm.

The question is, which one should we take, we either can choose, of course, a depth first traversal, or a breadth first traversal, I'll cut to the chase here.

And both of them would actually give you a strategy that works, meaning you can solve this with either a depth first or a breadth first strategy.

But maybe one of these algorithms would be better than the other.

So let's consider the possibilities.

So let's say I had some large graph, well think abstractly right now.

So kind of just looking at an abstract example.

And let's say I was stepping through some depth first traversal.

Let me say I have my starting node in yellow, and I'll have my target node in blue.

So what I want to do is, again, figure out what's the minimum path distance between these two nodes, obviously, you know, just in the long run, you should get an answer like two here, right, because two is definitely the shortest path between these two nodes.

If we did a depth first traversal, I know that depth first would force me to look in one direction as far as possible, until I have to switch directions, right.

So for my starting on yellow, let's say we move to the right, that'd be one edge and move to the right again, two edges move to the right, again, three edges.

At this point, I can't move right anymore.

So let's say you move downward, so at 456 have to switch directions, again, seven, eight.

And at this point, we kind of already see that this is going to end up possibly getting to the blue target node.

But that wouldn't be the shortest path.

Something unfortunate here is although my star and nodes are really close together, a depth first traversal could be unlucky in that it may search in a totally wrong direction, and snake all the way through the graph until it eventually finds my target node, at which point I definitely don't have the shortest path.

So I think a breadth first traversal is going to be more useful here.

So let's say start at my green node, still my same starting point.

And if I did a breadth first traversal, I know that breadth first means I'm going to explore all the directions very evenly.

So it would look like this.

So I would explore all nodes one edge away from my starting point.

And then from there, I would begin to explore all nodes two edges away from my starting point.

And at some point, I'm going to hit my target node.

And if it's the first time I'm seeing my target node, then by definition, I must have just found the shortest path, right, the shortest path would just be two.

So that's my high level argument for why a breadth first search is going to be more useful, in my opinion, for this problem, let's step through this process a little more algorithmically.

So let's say I had my original graph.

And if I'm gonna do a breadth first traversal, I know that I have to use a queue right no matter what a queue is what gives you that breadth first order.

And what I'll do is eyes the items of my queue, I'm going to store not only the nodes, but also the distance from my starting point, that means I'm going to initialize my starting note on the queue along with the distance of zero.

And that represents the fact that all right, that note of W is zero edges away from the starting point, because it itself is the starting point.

So at any point in time, the items of my queue are always going to be pairs, right of node comma distance.

So now we're going to begin our general algorithm, I'm going to keep iterating.

While my queue is not empty, a single iteration of breathless would remove the front end of my queue, and I'll label it as my current node.

At this point, I should check Alright, is my current node of W, the thing I'm looking for? It's not, so I need to explore W's neighbors.

So I can look at the x node.

And I know I need to add it into my queue.

But when I add it into my queue, I want to make sure I tag it with a distance.

So if my current node has this zero, I know that a neighbor of this node would have distance one, so I just increment the current distance by one.

So onto my queue, I put an item that says x comma one.

And I have a similar scenario for this V node.

It's also a neighbor of W.

And so I put v comma one on my queue as well.

At this point, I can go to my next iteration, or move the front of my queue.

So I look at the x.

And then I look at X's neighbors do bear in mind that because I have an undirected graph here, x really has two neighbors, right, it has w as a neighbor, as well as y.

So something you should already know is I need to track visited.

In other words, when x is going to consider its neighbors, it should really only care about the Y, right, I don't want X to put w back on the queue, because then I would get an infinite cycle.

So I'm just gonna look at the Y over here.

I'm going to add it to my queue.

Because I know my current note of X has a distance of one y must have a distance of two always just incrementing the distance by one.

Cool.

And then I carry on with this algorithm.

I removed the front of my queue now, which would be the V note.

And at this point, I can consider V's neighbors, and I do See that one of its neighbors is actually the Xena, that's the only unvisited neighbor, I'm going to be sure to add z into my queue and tag it with a distance of two, right, because if my v has distance one, its neighbor would have a distance of one grader.

At this point, you can already see how this algorithm is going to work out.

Eventually, this z nodes going to leave the queue, and that would actually be my target node.

So since I've added a node into the queue that matches my target, I know I have my final answer.

The two here does represent the number of edges we took in that logical path.

And I would, of course, just return that too.

So for the most part, this algorithm just sounds like a classic breadth first traversal.

Using a queue on a graph, the only interesting bit is now we're also going to track the current distance.

You know, when it comes to counting the length of a path, you need some counting mechanism.

And so if you begin your queue with your starting node with a distance of zero, every time something leaves a cube, and adds its neighbors, it should increment that distance by one.

And like you already guessed, this algorithm is pretty efficient, because we don't have to traverse through the graph more than one.

So we'll see that this has a linear complexity.

Alright, I think I have everything I need to code up this one, I'm sure you're wondering about these implementation details.

So what you want to do is possibly give this implementation a shot on your own.

And if you need some help, you can find me in those walkthrough videos.

See you there.

Hey, programmers, Alan here, right.

Now let's go over a JavaScript solution for the shortest path problem.

So we'll jump right in, hopefully, you watch the approach video.

And so we'll start by converting our edge list input into something more useful for our traversal like an adjacency list, we're going to write a very classic function.

When I call it build graph, like you expect it takes in the edges.

And I want it to return an adjacency list.

For me, that means a JavaScript object, I'll call it graph, by the end of this function, this will help I'm going to return the graph and some common code, I'm going to iterate through every pair, right, basically every edge, I'll say, for left edge of edges.

As I'm iterating, through every edge, when I want to do is unpack that edge into its component nodes, I'll call it a and b.

And now I can start formatting my adjacency list.

So I know I want the keys of this graph to be obviously the nodes, I want the values to be an array of the neighbors of that node.

So what I'll do is, it's the first time encountering a node, I'll check.

Alright, if this a node if it's not in the graph yet as a key, then I should create it for the first time.

So use it as a key and initialize its value to an empty array, basically, at the start is going to have no neighbors.

Likewise for B.

And then, at this point, I know that A and B now definitely exist as keys within the graph.

And so I just want to add those neighbors.

So if I have an edge, like w comma x, I know x is a neighbor of w, and w is a neighbor of x.

So simply put in say, graph a dot push B, and then just the inverse of that should be good to go.

Cool.

So that should give us our graph.

Let's go ahead and use that in our main function now.

So we'll just say graph equals build graph on the edges.

And what we want to do now is actually work in our breadth first logic, like we said from the approach video.

So a few things I'm going to do, I'm going to definitely set up my queue, we said that the key to victory here was to not only store the node in your queue, but for every like frame inside of your queue also store its distance from node A.

So I'll just use like a pair of things.

So the elements of my queue are going to be always a pair.

And I'll throw on the initial node A, and also the number zero, because at the start, right, this node A is zero edges away from itself.

So that's good to go.

And over time, I'm going to be incrementing.

This number, it seems nice.

And so let's keep on keepin on here.

All right, a while loop, classic condition would be all right, while your queue is not empty, then I shall remove something from the queue.

So always remove from the front if you want to follow a true breadth first order.

So I can do do dot shift.

And that will give me back an array or give me back one of these sub arrays here.

I know it's always going to be a pair so I can just unpack.

And I'll just say alright, grab the current node as well as the distance.

Nice.

I'm going to check the node here that I just removed from the queue.

If that node is node B, that I must have just found a path and I know the distance in that path, I can just return it.

But if this condition is not true, then I need to keep searching through my graph.

Since that means I need to add this nodes neighbors to the back of the queue.

So I'm going to iterate remember that we have adjacency lists the entire time.

So I'm going to say, for, let's say, Neighbor of graph of node.

So get all the neighbors of this node.

And what I'll do is just add those neighbors into my queue.

So q dot push, neighbor, try to remember what the form of our graph is over here.

Maybe as a quick little spot check, make sure on the same page, let me just console dot log, the adjacency lists, let's say we took this example manually, just paste it down below.

And I'll just give it nice little manual runs, I'm not running the test cases quite yet.

So we converted this edge list into this adjacency list, right.

And when we say no to something like W, when we say graph, square bracket, no, that would give us this array, co authored sorters, iterating, through all the neighbors of this node and adding them to the queue, one thing we should watch out for is when we push things back onto the queue, we want to maintain the same format.

So I actually still want to maintain pairs.

So I'll make the first element of the pair, the neighboring node on the second element needs to be the distance.

And since it's a neighbor, its distance would be plus one over here.

So that's how I'm growing and counting the distance.

So let's give this a test run.

There are a few things we need to work on still, though.

But we'll pass a few of these examples, at least until we timeout on a particular example.

One thing this code is missing is any cycle prevention, right? I know that it's going to be a very common scenario, because I have an undirected graph, right.

And so what I'll be sure to do is maintain a visited set, sort of pattern that you're used to, we're just gonna implemented for our iterative, breathless right now.

So start out with a set.

And when you do this iteratively, the move would be to make sure that if something is added to the queue, it should also be marked as visited.

So if I initialize my queue with node A, then I also want to initialize my visited set with node A, just like so.

So if you're unfamiliar with the set constructor in JavaScript, if you want to initialize it with some values, you actually have to pass in an array containing those values.

So the values of my visited set are just going to be the nodes write the node IDs.

Cool.

And then I want to work that logic into my while loop.

And so whenever I'm about to add something into the queue, that is, I'm going to add a neighbor into the queue, first check if that neighbor is not visited yet, so only if not visited has neighbor.

Right, so only if this neighbor has not yet been visited, then I should add it to my queue.

And if I'm about to add it to the queue, like we just said anything that interest, the queue should immediately be marked as visited.

So here I'll say visited, add, the neighbor net should avoid adding any particular node more than once into the queue, avoiding any cycles.

Awesome.

So that feels pretty good.

Let's give that a test run.

Now.

We hope to not timeout at least, all that same example, we're actually returning undefined where we expect negative one.

So if you look at the actual prompt, they tell us that, alright, if you can't find a path between A and B, then you should return negative one.

Let's look at an example or test 04.

And you kind of drew it out, you would see that there would be no such path that connects B to G.

The reason we're returning undefined right now is we're gonna finish our traversal mean, meaning our queue is going to empty out.

And then we're just going to hit the end of this function.

And if I don't hit a return line by default in JavaScript, I'm going to get undefined.

So we know if we finish the while loop, and we never found node B, then we can just return negative one, that must mean that there is no such path that connects a to b.

So let's give this a test run.

Now.

This should be our final version of our shortest path algorithm.

Awesome.

So be sure to practice this algorithm before you move on.

And do make sure that you understand the choice of breadth first here over depth first, for most of your basic just graph problems that require you to calculate a shortest path path meaning just the number of edges.

Typically, you'll find breadth first easiest way to calculate that hey programmers, Alvin here, right now let's go over to the approach for this island count problem.

So in this problem, we're going to be given a 2d array representing a grid of land and waters here we have l characters representing land, and W characters representing water.

Let's try to visualize this.

In this problem we want to do is return a number representing the number of islands on the grid.

We're going to consider an island as a vertical or horizontal connected region of land.

So in this particular example, we should return four.

Because there are four different islands, we can label them as such, this is going to be any type of problems for us.

And we should really think about it as if we have a graph, I'm going to refer to these style problems as a grid graph.

And so although we're not given any explicit like nodes and edges, I can still think about positions of this graph as nodes.

So for example, let's consider the indices here.

So I have my row indices along the left hand side, and my column indices along the top.

And I can designate any position of this grid using a pair of row and column.

So for example, if I looked at position three comma four, that would be this position over here.

And what I should do is mentally think about a position as if it's a node.

And if I met some node, I do have some potential neighbors.

given any position of the spread, I have at most four neighbors in the up down left and right directions.

given any position of the grid, it's really easy to determine what our potential neighbors are, it's really just a matter of adding or subtracting one from either the row or the column.

Let's generalize this formula.

So let's say I was at some position, we'll call it our see, if I want it to go upward, that would mean you decrement, the row by one, keep the column the same.

If you went down, that would mean increasing the row by one, if you went to the right, that would be increasing the column by one.

And if you want to go left, then you should just decrease the column by one, do bear in mind that the top left position of our grid is going to be 00.

And that's why we have this type of arithmetic rule.

So now that we're starting to frame this grid problem, as if it's a graph, we can use some common patterns, I know that this problem is really asked me to count the number of connected components or the number of islands on this grid.

So I'm going to need some iterative code, probably some nested loops to just iterate through every potential Island and start some traversal at that island.

So when it comes to our iterative code, we just want nested loops to iterate through every row column.

That means the iterations should look something like this, just moving left to right.

until we finish around which case we can go to the next row.

Let's actually iron out the main logic that we need in our algorithm.

So let's say we start or nested loops from the very beginning, what I do is check my current position, what I want to do is check if my current position is land right now it's water, so I can just continue.

On the next iteration, I do have some land position.

And since I'm on a piece of land, right now, what I want to do is explore this land region as far as possible, probably using some depth first traversal.

And do bear in mind, like most of our undirected graph problems, we're going to need to be sure to mark things as visited, so we don't get trapped in any infinite cycles.

So for example, if I started a traversal, at this position, I can go downward.

But I can also go upward from here.

And I can bounce back between the two going up and down, giving me an infinite cycle.

So we know how to fix this using all of our graph mechanics, right, just use a visited set.

So if I do a depth first traversal, starting at this position, I know I'm going to mark off all of these land pieces as visited.

And what I also want to do is make sure that I increments accounts, representing the fact that I've just explored some new island fully.

So right now, my count zero, since I just finished exploring something now my count is one.

And at this point, I can fall back to my iterative code to scan for another island.

So I move to the right, it's water.

So continue, water continue.

Now I have another island.

And again, I just do some depth first traversal through it.

And of course I increment my count.

This pattern will follow right? Eventually, when I hit the new row, I could be at a land position.

But I should also make sure that this land position is unexplored, right.

So since I'm at position one, comma zero, and this land has already been explored, I don't need to begin a depth first traversal.

And I also don't need to begin a traversal here.

And this continues, avoiding starting a traversal.

Wherever I have a visited piece of land, we know eventually, we're going to hit a new island like this one, where I have a piece of land that is unvisited.

So at that point, that's my criteria for starting a new depth first traversal, I explore this region, increment my count, and continue business as usual until I hit this final island that is unvisited.

And so I visit it and increment my count.

And by the end of my iterations, I should have my final count of four.

So that logic is actually pretty straightforward, just a variation of our classic connected component, counting logic, except now we're adjusting the criteria we use for looking at neighbors, right, our neighbors are actually going to just be either above downward to the left or to the right of our current position.

We talked about the complexity of this algorithm, we should consider the size of the input and the fact that it has two dimensions, right? So if I say that R is a number of rows, and C is a number of columns, well and the iterative codes pretty straightforward, I know that's going to give me r times C iterations.

And if I also consider any potential in depth first traversal I do starting at some land.

In the worst case, I could have one Giant Island, which is also going to be our time to see.

So the overall complexity, it's just going to be our time See, the space complexity for very similar reason is our time see, because imagine that we mark all of these positions as visited, that probably means we'd have to add them to some set.

Right, so we have our time see different positions.

And by the end, I could add each and every one of them into my set, the space complexity of our time.

See also includes any traversal related data structures like stacks, or queues, depending on how you implement this one.

So overall, this is going to be a very efficient solution to solve this one, what you should do is probably give it a shot on your own first, if you get stuck, you can find me in the walkthrough videos.

I'll see you there.

Hey, programmers, Alvin here, right now, let's go over a JavaScript walkthrough for this island count problem.

So as always, make sure you watch the approach video first.

And we'll jump right in.

So we know that this is really just a spin off of our kind of graph connected components problems, except now we have a grid graph, right? I can still think about like this grid as if it's a graph, because if I think about any particular position of this grid, I know I have some neighboring positions that I can travel through mainly, my four neighbors Up, down, left and right for me, let me start my laying down some iterative code that can begin a traversal at every node or every position of this grid.

That way, I can start considering different islands, right.

So I'm going to use just a for loop for this, I'm going to iterate through every possible row column combinations every position.

So I'll say R equals zero, iterate up to the length of the grid, so grid dot length to our plus equals one, and do something very similar for my columns nested inside, right? Watch out for some details here though, looking at the examples, we can't actually assume that we're always get a square shaped grid square meaning like as if the number of rows was the same as the number of columns, because sometimes I'll have like an asymmetric grid occasionally, right? If I look at this very first one, it looks like the width is going to be five here, but the height is six.

So separately for the columns, I want to reference the column lines over here.

So we're gonna say grid, zero length.

Nice.

And so at this point, I have some row composition, I want to begin a traversal, let's say a depth first traversal at that position.

So here's where I invoke some like helper function, that will make it a little bit, I'll call it explore.

And what's going to do is, of course, taking the grid information, as well as the row column I want to traverse through nice.

And at this point, I think we'll actually hop to building this this helper function, then we probably need to fill out some more logic within our main driver function here.

So let's bake this explore helper function.

So taking the grid and your row column, and something I should also consider is because I know that this is really a type of graph problem, right? I want to prevent infinite cycles, right? So consider this, let's say I was somewhere in the middle of my traversal, let's say I was at this piece of land, I know that this piece of land is going to travel through its right neighbor.

And it could be the case that this piece of land now travels its left neighbor, so I go left and then right and then left and right.

Now it gives me an infinite loop, right.

So whenever you have this notion of like undirected graph or undirected connections, then always guard with a visited set.

We've seen this pattern before.

So maybe up top globally, for the entire traversal, I'll create a visited set.

So in JavaScript, just a new set, you're probably wondering, you know, what am I going to make the members of this set? Well, I need to designate positions, right? Think about it as if positions are like the nodes in this grid in this graph, right.

And so what I'll do is pass along this visit set, so I can accept it as an org over here.

And when it comes to using your visited set, what you want to do is make sure you combine your row and column because together they designate your actual position.

I think this is actually worth going through specifically more of like a language thing in JavaScript, compared to other programming languages.

So quick aside over here, let me get myself some more room might be a while.

Because if you're unfamiliar with sets, and you don't kind of know, their nuances, might actually hit you in the butt later on.

So let's say I had a set so I'll create an offset.

So can you set and let's say I added I don't know, like an array containing a row column position.

So I'm gonna say is, alright, maybe I had position, I don't know, one comma three.

And I added that into my set.

So I do s dot add that position.

This is actually a common gotcha in JavaScript.

If you put any like reference types, like an array or like an object into your set, it's actually going to check for reference equality when you check for existence later on.

In other words, now I can't really do console dot log s dot has one three, because this array literal is technically a different array in memory.

So I wish I could get like true back in this scenario, but I'm not going to get a true.

So we'll just run that manually see what we get.

So like, we say, we're gonna get a false here, which is not so good.

So instead, your Fix would be to actually convert this into some string data.

So instead, maybe write as if you had one comma three, because strings are primitive types, and I would actually be able to store that string.

So whenever I say the string literal, this would actually give me a match now, so I should get a nice true here.

Awesome.

So we'll want to use that pattern to our advantage.

And so maybe I'll start by creating some position variable, that's going to be like the string of FIDE a version of our position.

So just take my row, maybe add a comma, and also put the column here.

Nice.

And the reason I want to comma separate is, I need to have different bounds for my row and column.

In other words, imagine I had a row of let's say, 12.

And I had a column of four.

If I turn that into a key, or a position, that would give me position as looks like 12, comma for another scenario, let's say I had row one, and then column 24, that would give me a position of this right? one comma 24.

Right, it's really important that you put a comma to separate your row and column positions, because imagine, I didn't put the comma, then it would have a collision here, I have two totally distinct positions, right? 12, four, and 124.

And if I don't put a comma, they look like they have the same position key.

So that's why I need to comma separate them.

Common gotcha there.

But now that I have this position, I can use it to my advantage in this visited set.

So if I've already visited this position, so if my visited has this position, then I should exit, right, I need to return something.

And I want this explorer function do something similar, like we've done in our old component problems, I want it to return a Boolean indicating whether or not this is a new island that I'm exploring.

So if it's visited already, that's definitely not new, right.

So just return false, meaning it's not a new island.

If I make it past this if statement, in other words, if position is not in visited, that I need to mark it as visited right now, second, do visited, add this position.

So now I have my core like cycle prevention logic.

Beyond that, I have a few other scenarios, we know that in our traversal, we're going to look at our different like neighbors.

And so what I want to do is make sure that I'm in bounds here.

So I'm going to check, like to split this up into variables, I'll say, one, a boolean variable called row in bounds.

And I'll do is just check if zero is less than or equal to the row.

And that row is strictly less than will say, the length of my grid.

So I'm just checking to see if my opposition is in bounds here, I do a quick check, I need to be inclusive with zero because zero is a totally valid index, right? I need to be exclusive with the length because imagine I had a grid with length five, it's last valid index is four.

So I need to be strictly less than here.

And I'll write a similar variable for my column in bounds, just like this.

And at this point, I can write a nice semantic if statement check, all right, if your row is not in bounds, or your column is not in bounds, then exit, right? So return like before I can return false, right? Because I should not consider like an invalid position and a balanced position as an island, right? So that's looking good.

Final base case I need though is, what if my current position is water, right? I only want to do my traversal through land.

And so I'll add another statement for that.

So up here, I can check.

All right, if my grid at row column, if it's equal to water, then also return false.

No reason to count it, it's really important that you put this in bounds check before you index into your grid, right? Because imagine that your row and column were out of bounds.

If you write line 15 like this, immediately, you're going to get an out of bounds error.

So start with your guard to check if you're in bounds if you want it to because most of these conditionals they all return false have the same consequence.

You can probably or them together.

Typically I like to keep them separate.

That way I always remember to write them typically for like your grid graph problems.

This is very canonical code.

Alright, so if I make it past all of these base cases, and I have the recursive case, so I must be at an unvisited piece of land.

And when I want to do is do my depth first traversal, right.

So here's where I explore my neighbors and I have four neighbors.

If I wanted to go above that I decrement, my row by one, keep the column the same, pass along the same visited, because remember, we have like the array indices here.

So this is row zero, this is row one.

So we'll lower row numbers mean upward, in the same way, lower column numbers mean to the left.

So this is up, this is down by do just minus one over here, that would be to the left, then plus one on the column would be to the right.

Cool, and I can keep this code very flat as it is something that I'm a huge proponent of when you write recursion, for the most part, I always try to make sure that I don't look before I leap.

In other words, just from this logic alone, it couldn't be the case that row minus one is out of bounds.

But that's okay.

Because if it's out of bounds, when I evaluate this call, it's going to immediately be caught by this base case, right.

And if I express my logic like this, if I don't look, before I leave, if I just leap and then catch myself with the base case, you don't have to write repetitive code.

In other words, some people write code like this, where it's like, Alright, if row minus one inbounds kind of using pseudocode.

Here, they would have to write row plus one inbounds.

And you would have to write a guarding if statement around every recursive call, instead, just write one base case.

And you can catch all of these different out of bounds, right.

So that's why I prefer it this way.

And so I know that by the time I return out of these recursive calls, I'm back at this segment of my code.

And what I can do is return true because I must be finished with that traversal.

And the reason I'm returning true is true symbolizes that I've just finished exploring a brand new island, so I need to count it.

Nice.

It's also consistent with the data type, I have Boolean for this explore function.

So for the most part, this looks like really just a spin off of our previous like graph, depth first code.

And now I want to use that boolean data in my main function here.

So here's where I can actually count my islands.

So guess I really need some logic here that says initialize some counts equal to zero.

And whenever you find a new island, increment that count.

So if I just have found a new island, we're going to get back true from this this call, right? Because remember that I'm beginning a traversal, starting at this row column position.

So if it gives me back true, then I can totally increment my count by one.

Notice that whenever I begin a traversal on a position I've seen before, it would have been added to visited before.

So I would return via this if statement on line 21, I return false.

If I return false, then I don't double count that island.

So I do need a combination of both iterative code to potentially leap to different islands.

But I can use a visited set to prevent myself from double counting any particular Island.

So this is looking pretty good.

Let's not forget to of course, return our counts at the end.

Let's give this a run.

This will probably be the first in a series of these like grid graph problems.

Really try to understand how we can think about still a grid as if it's a graph, right? We just have different rules for how we look at our neighbors.

Right? Now, a node is really a position and its neighbors are its four neighbors Up, down, left and right.

Alright programmers, I want you to practice this pattern because we're going to see it in the next few problems.

I'll leave it to you see in the next one.

Hey, programmers outlane here, right now let's go over an approach for this minimum Island problem.

So we're going to be given here a grid containing a water inland really just some characters inside of our grid.

So of course, as always, let's visualize this.

And what I want to do in this problem is return a number representing the minimum Island size, we're going to consider an island, a connected region of vertical or horizontally connected pieces of land.

So for this particular input, our answer should be to looking at our grid, I have three separate islands.

And they all have different sizes, right? sizes, a four, two and five, I just choose the smallest of the islands.

So that would be the two over here.

So how can I actually come up with a strategy for this one, you should already know that this is just a spin off of our previous a grid graph problem, where instead of doing just a count of the number of islands, now I want to find the sizes of islands.

I know to actually look at different islands, I'm gonna need some nested code, but I'm also gonna need some depth first traversal code to explore a single Island.

So overall, this should be a pretty classic strategy for us.

So let's say we start attacking this we know we're going to begin our nested loops in the top left corner And if our current position is water, then we actually don't need to do anything.

next iteration, I have some land.

At this point, I could begin on my depth first traversal.

And I know that I should be marking things as visited to avoid any infinite loops, right.

So by the time this traversal completes, I'm going to mark all of these guys as visited.

But I also wanted to determine the size of this entire island region.

So every time I get a position that is land, I should treat it as one.

And then when it comes to how I implement on my traversal, I can just gather up these ones, right, just add them all up.

So that would look something like this.

And for my top level call for that traversal, I should get an island size of four.

And so if that kind of traversal algorithm, especially how we compute the size of the island, is pretty hand wavy, don't worry that when we actually go through the code walkthrough, it's just a matter of some recursion, and some recursion we've actually seen before in past problems of the course.

But any case, now that I have this island size of four, it's actually the first island that I've seen.

And so I'm going to consider it the mid size so far.

But I need to keep looking in case something is smaller.

So move to the right.

So if it's water, I do nothing, water again, do nothing.

Now I have another islands, I begin my traversal market these as visited.

And when I find the size of this island, of course, it's going to give me two, I compare that to to my current mid size two is smaller, so I store two as the mid size so far.

And we just continue business as usual.

Note that when we get to a piece of land, we really want to make sure that it's land, but also a piece of unvisited land.

So right now on that piece of land, but it's visited, so I should not wear I don't need to start traversal here.

Likewise, for this position.

Eventually, I'm going to hit some new unvisited land, in which case I should begin my traversal at Explorer, this region, and I want to count up all of these pieces of land.

And I should realize that the final size of this island would be five, I can compare that five against my current min, five is bigger, so the size of two gets to stay.

And I can just end up returning the minimum size by the end of this algorithm, basically representing this island of size two, the complexity of this algorithm is straightforward, we should say that the size of our input is r times C, because we have our rows and C columns, in which case a time complexity is simply our time C, right, we have to iterate through every row column within the grid.

And even when we begin a traversal, in the worst case, we could have an island that spans the entire grid, in which case it would also be our C.

Right.

So overall, our full complexities are time c space complexities are time C as well.

And do know that this is technically a linear solution in the size of the grid, right because the grid itself is exactly r times C positions.

So with that, I think we're ready to code this one up and try it on your own first.

And if you get stuck, I'll catch you in the walkthrough videos.

See you there.

Hey, programmers, Alvin here, right now let's go over a JavaScript walkthrough for this minimum Island problem.

So we'll jump right in, make sure you watch the approach video.

As always, this is just a nice spin off of our classic island hopping logic.

But for a grid graph, right.

And so let's start with the iterative code that can help us begin a traversal.

Starting at every different position of our grids, that just means some nested loops.

So start by iterating through all of the rows and columns.

So r equals zero, go up to while r is less than length of the grid, also do our plus equals one and very similar loop for my column.

But do make sure that you reference your inner column line because you could have like a rectangular shaped grid over here.

And what I want to do now is begin a traversal starting at every row column.

So I'm going to assume I have a helper function here that does that traversal, I'm going to call it explore size.

That's because in the long run, I'm interested in the size of that island, right, so like a number representing how big or how many positions that island spans.

So I'm going to pass along the grid information as well as the position.

And I know when it comes to all of these like undirected graph, traversals should probably guard against your loops.

And I have some foresight here.

So I'm going to pass along a nice visited set, which I can maintain globally for the entire traversal because there's only a good reason to explore a position once right.

So I'll create const visited gonna make it my neighs JavaScript set.

And a few reasons for that.

Well, for one JavaScript set, gives me O of one lookup, but also o of one insertion.

So it's going to be a really quick data structure to use.

And from there, we probably have to add some more logic over here to actually do something with the size but for now, I think I'm going to switch gears and actually take a look at building this helper function, right.

So I think the best way to build this traversal is to use is a deaf purse, typically just my go to for problem like this, it's going to take in I know the grid, the row in the column and also visited, I need some a base case is very classic base cases, I'm going to start by checking if this row column position is inbounds.

So my favorite pattern for that is to split up in some variables just makes it easier to read and debug.

So I'm going to say is my row inbounds and just make that like a boolean variable.

So I'll check if, let's say, zero is less than or equal to the row, I need to say and right, and that row should be strictly less than the grid length.

So this Boolean would only be true if it's in bounds, right? And something very similar for my column bounds should be between zero and grid zero length.

Nice just like this, I believe.

And then I can write a nice if statement using both clauses.

So I can say, all right, if let's say your row is not in balance, or your column is not in balance, then you're definitely at a bound.

So you should probably use some base case here, right? So we're all choose to return here is zero, because I want to keep a consistent number, right consistent return type.

That is, I know that this function has a kind of goal of returning the size of the explored islands sizes a number.

So even in my base case, I need to make sure I return some type of number, returning zero to represent that, hey, if this is out of bounds, it's not going to contribute anything into the count of the size, right, which is good to go.

I need some other base case here.

What if my position is inbounds.

But what if it's actually water, I don't want to count that as well.

I only want to count islands.

So land right.

So quick fix, what I'll do is add a new base case, I can check if my grid at row column, if it's equal to the water character.

So a capital W can also return zero.

If you want it to, you can also maybe merge these into like a single if statement, just write a bunch of ORS, I kind of like them separate because it's just easy for me to remember what each of them does write a final conditional have here is alright, if I make it past both of these base cases, it might be the case that this position is land, but it's land I've already visited.

So here's why I work in my visited logic, I'm going to represent a position, like we said in the last episode as really just a string.

So I can put it as the members of my visited set.

So I'm going to say position to have to be the row plus a comma plus the column.

So just representing the position, that's because I can't add like an array into a visited set, and then look it up later.

And so if visited has the position, then it's a duplicate position that I've explored.

So return zero.

Otherwise, it's not been visited yet.

So I must be visiting it right now.

So I can add it.

Nice.

So I have my base cases laid down.

Now I'll need my actual recursive code.

So I'll explore my four neighbors.

By now you should be familiar with this pattern.

So go upwards, a row minus one column pass on the same visited.

So I'm going to explore my up down left right neighbors respectively.

And I do my recursively buffet theory, right.

So what type do I expect back from these calls, they're going to give me back a number representing the size of the island that my neighbor is a part of.

But if my neighbor is part of some larger Island, then I am too because we're connected right to our neighbors.

And so I want to create the grand total of all of these return values.

So I'm going to create some size variable, let's say let size, I'm going to initialize it to one over here, it's going to be one and not zero, because the one represents my current position, my row column.

And whatever these calls return, whatever number I'm just going to increment my size by that number, like so.

Then finally, I can return our total size over here.

So that will do my depth first traversal, because it's recursive, but we'll also tally up the size of this island region.

Cool.

So now that I have a working explore size helper, let's use it in our main function here.

So I'm going to get back a number from this call.

I'll call it my respective size.

And what's great about this logic is if I have a Island or position I've already seen before, and I encounter it again in this this for loop, then I would just return early because I would hit this base case, right? If something has already been visited, just automatically return zero, because I've already considered it, no reason to consider it again.

But now I need my minimization logic, right, I want the size of the smallest Island.

And they tell us in the problem that we can totally assume that your grid contains at least one island.

So I think a great default value here is to use positive infinity so I can set some will say min size variable To be positive infinity, JavaScript, if I make it positive infinity, I know when I encounter any like valid Island size, it's going to be less than infinity.

And it should replace it.

So now I can do some min logic here and check.

All right, if the size of this island is less than the minimum size I have seen so far, then just replace that min size with that island.

Then after I'm done with all of these traversals potential reversals, I'll return my mid size.

So some classic patterns here.

There's one nuance that we're not considering how to run the code, and we can debug it together.

So it looks like we failed example.

00.

So the very first example we expected to answer to, we accidentally gave back zero.

If you look at that first example, it's pretty obvious that Yeah, the minimum size is two representing this island over here.

The reason we're giving back zero is according to our code.

Let's see we're on like the very first iteration, I'm going to respond it, I know that row is going to be zero column is going to be zero, that means my position would be this w over here.

When I make the recursive call, and I pass along position 00, I know that it's going to immediately return zero because that position is water.

And I'm going to check Alright, is that zero, less than infinity it is, so I'm going to replace min size with zero.

But if I think about it, zero doesn't even represent a real Island.

If an island has a size of zero, then it's not an island at all, it was a piece of water, right? And so I want to add some additional logic here to only actually look at nonzero quantities.

So only do the comparison if that size is also valid.

So size should be greater than zero, of course.

And we'll want to add these together.

So let's try that again.

Just a little, little detail over there that we need.

Awesome.

And there we have a solution for this minimum Island problem.

So we've seen this pattern a few times now, right or classic island hopping logic.

So when you think about islands are like connected components of a graph, this should be your first kind of go to algorithm.

Alright programmers.

So that wraps up our course on graphs.

I hope you learned a ton during the course.

I definitely had a blast making it Be sure to head to Shruti dotnet, where you can continue to practice more graph problems, as well as explore any other data structure algorithm topics.

I'll see you there.