Timeline for Double Linked List remove method

7 events

when toggle format	what		by	license	comment
Oct 12, 2014 at 17:17	history	edited	sha	CC BY-SA 3.0	added 125 characters in body
Oct 12, 2014 at 17:15	comment	added	sha		I agree that we better separate search into its own function. As for readability - I think adding comments would solve it. I will update the answer.
Oct 12, 2014 at 16:49	comment	added	tim		oh, but still +1 for this solution. It's pretty much how oracle implemented this.
Oct 12, 2014 at 16:45	comment	added	Aki K		I agree with @tim that your ifs even though they look better they do not convey as well what they are for I think. The separation of the logic though is something that I might do.
Oct 12, 2014 at 16:16	comment	added	tim		Your simplified checks should work, but I think they are a bit harder to understand (and technically, it's still four cases). I also wouldn't split the method, but if you do, I would do it like this: Change your `void remove(T)` method to `Node<T> search(T)`, then add a new `remove(T)` method which uses `search` and `remove`. That way, you can reuse `search` for other operations (like `contains`). Oh, and make all methods containing `Node` in the signature private, as it shouldn't be exposed.
Oct 12, 2014 at 15:50	history	edited	sha	CC BY-SA 3.0	added 492 characters in body
Oct 12, 2014 at 15:39	history	answered	sha	CC BY-SA 3.0