this is a simple school project, you need to answer all questions and provide me with the code (with comments), and the graph on excel
here's the description:
You need to do the following as empirical study described below:
First: you need to implement Heap and merge sort correctly as a separate function in C++. The input is a dynamic array where (the user to input n (the size of the array A) and randomly generate the n elements of A).
Second: the code should compute the time taken by each sorting (Heap and merge sort) to complete the execution of
Third: Use the problem size as 10,102, 103, 104, 105 and so on and Compare the run-time performance of Heap sort and merge sort for a single large problem size, but under different problem.
Fourth: Generate a single graph where the x axis is the problem size (used in Third step A) and the y axis is the time to run the algorithm given by your program. There should be two lines on the graph, one for Heap sort and one for merge sort .Your graph should be clearly captioned with the axis labeled.
Answer the following:
A. For which values of n does Heap sort beat merge sort, discuss the result you got?
B. For which value of n your program stop working and why. Attach snapshot of the message that stop your program (print screen)
C. What are the running machine speed, RAM, and the used running IDE (print screen)?
D. Discuss the advantage and disadvantage of each sorting techniques (Heap and merge) based your program run.
28 freelancerów złożyło ofertę na kwotę $37 do tego projektu
Hi, I've got quite some experience with C and C++ and I'm sure I can finish this work within 24 hours. I do have a couple of questions however, may I ask over the chat?
Hi, I have a good experience of coding in C++. I assure you that your work will be done perfectly and in minimum possible [login to view URL] give me a chance. Thank you.
i can generate the functions to compare the running time of both sorting methods in C++ and generate the graph to compare, if its in my hands i can do it as fast as possible. thanks