On a 2D plane, there are n
points with integer coordinates points[i] = [xi, yi]
. Return the minimum time in seconds to visit all the points in the order given by points
.
You can move according to these rules:
1
second, you can either:
sqrt(2)
units (in other words, move one unit vertically then one unit horizontally in 1
second).
Example 1:
Input: points = [[1,1],[3,4],[-1,0]] Output: 7 Explanation: One optimal path is [1,1] -> [2,2] -> [3,3] -> [3,4] -> [2,3] -> [1,2] -> [0,1] -> [-1,0] Time from [1,1] to [3,4] = 3 seconds Time from [3,4] to [-1,0] = 4 seconds Total time = 7 seconds
Example 2:
Input: points = [[3,2],[-2,2]] Output: 5
Constraints:
points.length == n
1 <= n <= 100
points[i].length == 2
-1000 <= points[i][0], points[i][1] <= 1000
This problem involves finding the minimum time to visit a series of points in a 2D plane, given constraints on movement. We can move one unit vertically, one unit horizontally, or diagonally (one unit in each direction) in one second.
The key insight is that the minimum time to travel between two points (x1, y1) and (x2, y2) is the maximum of the absolute differences in their x and y coordinates: max(|x2 - x1|, |y2 - y1|)
. This is because we can always choose a path that uses diagonal moves as much as possible to minimize the time.
The solution iterates through the pairs of consecutive points, calculates the minimum time to travel between each pair using the formula above, and sums up these times.
from itertools import pairwise
class Solution:
def minTimeToVisitAllPoints(self, points: list[list[int]]) -> int:
total_time = 0
for (x1, y1), (x2, y2) in pairwise(points):
total_time += max(abs(x2 - x1), abs(y2 - y1))
return total_time
The pairwise
function from the itertools
library efficiently generates pairs of consecutive elements in the list of points. This makes the code cleaner and more readable. If itertools
isn't available (e.g., in some restricted coding environments), a manual loop can be used as demonstrated in the other language examples.
The same core logic is implemented in other languages below, demonstrating the adaptability of this approach:
Java:
class Solution {
public int minTimeToVisitAllPoints(int[][] points) {
int totalTime = 0;
for (int i = 1; i < points.length; i++) {
int dx = Math.abs(points[i][0] - points[i - 1][0]);
int dy = Math.abs(points[i][1] - points[i - 1][1]);
totalTime += Math.max(dx, dy);
}
return totalTime;
}
}
C++:
class Solution {
public:
int minTimeToVisitAllPoints(vector<vector<int>>& points) {
int totalTime = 0;
for (size_t i = 1; i < points.size(); ++i) {
int dx = abs(points[i][0] - points[i - 1][0]);
int dy = abs(points[i][1] - points[i - 1][1]);
totalTime += max(dx, dy);
}
return totalTime;
}
};
JavaScript:
/**
* @param {number[][]} points
* @return {number}
*/
var minTimeToVisitAllPoints = function(points) {
let totalTime = 0;
for (let i = 1; i < points.length; i++) {
let dx = Math.abs(points[i][0] - points[i-1][0]);
let dy = Math.abs(points[i][1] - points[i-1][1]);
totalTime += Math.max(dx, dy);
}
return totalTime;
};
These examples all follow the same efficient O(n) time and O(1) space algorithm. The only variation is the syntax specific to each programming language.