Done Two-Pointers-1

[vaishnavi2231]

No description provided.

[super30admin]

• Strengths:
  • The student demonstrates a good understanding of the two-pointer technique across different problems.
  • The code is clean, well-commented, and follows best practices.
  • The solutions are efficient and correctly handle edge cases.
• Areas for Improvement:
  • While the solutions are correct, it would be beneficial to see more consistency in the problem-solving approach. For example, the "3sum" problem includes additional checks for duplicates, which shows attention to detail, but this level of detail isn't necessary for the other problems.
  • The student could consider adding more comments or explanations for the logic in the "container-with-most-water" solution, as it is less commented compared to the others.

[super30admin]

• The student's solution is well-implemented and follows best practices. The approach is clear and efficient.
• The comments and structure of the code are good, making it easy to understand.
• One minor suggestion would be to ensure consistency in variable naming (e.g., l and r could be more descriptive like left and right), but this is a minor point and does not affect functionality.
• The solution for "3sum.py" and "container-with-most-water.py" are also correctly implemented, showing a good understanding of two-pointer techniques across different problems.