Before attempting this problem, you should be comfortable with:
The most straightforward approach is to check every pair of points and determine if the vertical area between them contains any other points. For each pair, we compute the horizontal distance and verify that no other point lies strictly between them in the x-coordinate. This gives us the correct answer but is inefficient for large inputs.
x1 and x2, check if any other point has an x-coordinate strictly between min(x1, x2) and max(x1, x2).class Solution:
def maxWidthOfVerticalArea(self, points: List[List[int]]) -> int:
n = len(points)
res = 0
for i in range(1, n):
x1 = points[i][0]
for j in range(i):
x2 = points[j][0]
hasPoints = False
for k in range(n):
if k == i or k == j:
continue
x3 = points[k][0]
if x3 > min(x1, x2) and x3 < max(x1, x2):
hasPoints = True
break
if not hasPoints:
res = max(res, abs(x1 - x2))
return resThe key insight is that a vertical area containing no points must exist between two consecutive points when sorted by x-coordinate. If we sort all points by their x-values, the widest gap between adjacent points gives us the answer directly. This works because any non-adjacent pair would have at least one point between them, making that area invalid.
points array by x-coordinate.The problem asks for the widest vertical area, which means we need to find gaps along the x-axis. A common mistake is to consider y-coordinates or try to compute 2D distances between points.
# Wrong: using y-coordinate
width = abs(points[i][1] - points[j][1])
# Correct: using x-coordinate only
width = abs(points[i][0] - points[j][0])After sorting by x-coordinate, the maximum gap must occur between consecutive points. Some attempt to check all pairs even after sorting, which is unnecessary and leads to O(n^2) complexity.
# Wrong: checking all pairs after sorting
for i in range(n):
for j in range(i + 1, n):
res = max(res, points[j][0] - points[i][0])
# Correct: only check adjacent pairs
for i in range(n - 1):
res = max(res, points[i + 1][0] - points[i][0])When sorting 2D points, the default sort may use both x and y coordinates for tie-breaking. While this still works, some mistakenly sort by y-coordinate or use a complex comparator when only x matters.
# Correct: sort by x-coordinate (y doesn't affect the answer)
points.sort(key=lambda p: p[0])