{"id":199,"date":"2026-07-29T14:50:53","date_gmt":"2026-07-29T14:50:53","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/blog.csfree.org\/?p=199"},"modified":"2026-08-01T15:38:54","modified_gmt":"2026-08-01T15:38:54","slug":"understanding-algorithmic-efficiency-time-vs-space-complexity","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blog.csfree.org\/index.php\/2026\/07\/29\/understanding-algorithmic-efficiency-time-vs-space-complexity\/","title":{"rendered":"Understanding Algorithmic Efficiency: Time vs Space Complexity"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

Understanding Algorithmic Efficiency: Time vs Space Complexity<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Imagine you are writing a simple program<\/strong> for a college assignment to sort student exam marks from lowest to highest. You test your code locally on your laptop with just 10 numbers, and the result pops up instantly in a tiny fraction of a second. An<\/strong> algorithm is just a step by step process that takes inputs, processes them, and gives back an output<\/strong>. When you run your sorting code on 10 numbers, everything feels completely fine, so you assume your code is ready for real users.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

However, the way your code sorts those numbers matters a lot. If you use a basic method like Bubble Sort<\/strong>, the computer compares neighboring numbers and swaps them repeatedly until the whole list is ordered. For 10 numbers, Bubble Sort<\/strong> does around 100 comparisons,<\/strong> which takes almost no time at all for a modern computer processor. But what happens when your professor asks you to sort 1,000,000 numbers<\/strong> instead? Suddenly, that small list scales up to a massive dataset, and the total number of operations explodes into 1,000,000 multiplied by 1,000,000<\/strong>, which equals 1 trillion <\/strong>operations. In general terms, if you have n<\/mi>n<\/annotation><\/semantics><\/math> numbers, Bubble Sort<\/strong> takes roughly n<\/mi>2<\/mn><\/msup>n^2<\/annotation><\/semantics><\/math> operations to finish.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This sudden jump in required operations is precisely why your local setup crashes. When your laptop attempts to handle 1 trillion comparisons,<\/strong> your CPU usage spikes to 100 percent, your fan starts spinning at maximum speed, and your memory fills up until the operating system freezes or shuts down the program. But, do you know? your program did not crash because the logic was wrong or because your code had a bug. It crashed because your local setup simply ran out of system resources<\/strong> while trying to process an algorithm that scales poorly.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

You might wonder why we do not just use a stopwatch to measure how fast code runs in seconds. Measuring real time with a stopwatch is unpredictable<\/strong> because code runs much faster on an expensive desktop than on a budget student laptop, and running background applications can slow everything down. To fix this, computer scientists measure time complexity by counting how the number of steps grows as n<\/mi>n<\/annotation><\/semantics><\/math> numbers increase. Understanding this relationship helps you predict whether your code will run smoothly or crash your laptop before you ever deploy it to real users.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Code isn’t just about correctness, rather it’s about resource efficiency (time & memory).<\/h4>\n\n\n\n

When we learn to code, our first goal is simply making the program work, getting the right answer for the input we give it. But in the real world, a program that gives the correct answer is useless if it takes three days to run or consumes so much memory that it crashes the server.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Resource efficiency is about balancing two limited assets – time<\/strong> (how quickly your CPU finishes the work) and memory<\/strong> (how much RAM your program occupies while running). Writing good code means finding sufficiency where your program is not only logically correct, but also suitable enough to run fast and light so as to fit within hardware limits as your data set grows.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Let’s see a real-world scenario :<\/h4>\n\n\n\n

Imagine standing in a crowded college library, looking for the word “Polynomial”<\/strong> in a massive, 2,000-page physical dictionary.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

If you don’t know any smart searching strategies, you would start at page 1 and scan every single word, page by page, until you hit page 1,200. If reading a page takes just one second, checking page 1 to 1,200 would take you a painful 20 minutes<\/strong>. If the dictionary doubled in size to 4,000 pages, your search time would double to 40 minutes. This is a linear scan<\/strong> (O<\/mi>(<\/mo>n<\/mi>)<\/mo><\/mrow>O(n)<\/annotation><\/semantics><\/math>) – it gets twice as slow every time your input doubles.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Instead, you intuitively open the dictionary right in the middle around the M section. You see “Polynomial” comes after<\/em> M, so you throw away the entire left half of the book without reading a single word on those 1,000 pages. You then flip to the middle of the remaining half, see T, throw away the right side, and repeat. By cutting the remaining pages in half with every single flip, you zero in on “Polynomial” in roughly 11 page flips<\/strong>, taking less than 15 seconds<\/strong> total.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

If that dictionary grew from 2,000 pages to a staggering 1 million pages<\/strong>, scanning page-by-page would take over 11 days<\/strong> of non-stop reading, while halving the book repeatedly would still take only 20 page flips<\/strong> (around 30 seconds). That dramatic difference is the power of an efficient algorithm O<\/mi>(<\/mo>n<\/mi>l<\/mi>o<\/mi>g<\/mi>n<\/mi>)<\/mo><\/mrow>O(nlogn)<\/annotation><\/semantics><\/math>, it solves the exact same problem using a tiny fraction of the time.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

What is Time Complexity?<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

Time complexity<\/strong> is a way to measure how fast an algorithm runs as the input size (usually called n<\/mi>n<\/annotation><\/semantics><\/math>) grows.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Instead of measuring time with a stopwatch in seconds, which changes depending on whether you are using a fast gaming PC or a slow laptop, we count the number of fundamental steps or operations<\/strong> the computer has to perform.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

What is Big-O Notation?<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

Big-O Notation<\/strong> is the mathematical label we give to describe an algorithm’s time complexity. It describes the upper bound<\/strong> or worst-case scenario of how many steps an algorithm takes.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

It drops constant numbers and smaller terms to focus purely on the overall rate of growth. For example, if an algorithm takes 3<\/mn>n<\/mi>+<\/mo>5<\/mn><\/mrow>3n+5<\/annotation><\/semantics><\/math> steps, Big-O simplifies it to just O<\/mi>(<\/mo>n<\/mi>)<\/mo><\/mrow>O(n)<\/annotation><\/semantics><\/math> because as n<\/mi>n<\/annotation><\/semantics><\/math> grows into millions, the extra 3 and 5 barely matter.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Common Big-O Categories :<\/h4>\n\n\n\n
    \n
  • O(<\/strong>1<\/mn>1<\/annotation><\/semantics><\/math>) \u2014 Constant Time:<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n

    The gold standard of algorithmic efficiency where execution time remains completely identical regardless of how large the input dataset grows. Whether processing five items or five million <\/strong>items, the computer calculates the exact memory location and retrieves the data in a single step<\/strong>, such as accessing an array element directly by its index or looking up a student’s profile instantly using their unique ID number. In everyday life, this is like taking a book directly off a shelf when you already know its exact shelf number, rather than searching through the whole room.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

      \n
    • O(<\/strong>l<\/mi>o<\/mi>g<\/mi>n<\/mi><\/mrow>log n<\/annotation><\/semantics><\/math>) \u2014 Logarithmic Time:<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n

      An exceptionally fast growth rate where the total number of steps grows very slowly because the algorithm eliminates half of the remaining dataset<\/strong> with every single operation. A classic code example is Binary Search<\/strong> on a sorted list<\/strong>, where continually cutting the search space in half allows the computer to find a specific item among one million records in roughly twenty steps. In the real world, this is like finding a word in a printed dictionary by opening it to the middle, seeing if your word comes before or after that page, and throwing away half the book with every flip.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

        \n
      • O(<\/strong>n<\/mi>n<\/annotation><\/semantics><\/math>) \u2014 Linear Time:<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n

        A steady, proportional growth rate where the number of required operations increases in direct 1-to-1 harmony<\/strong> with the size of the input. This typically occurs when a program uses a single loop to inspect every item in an unsorted collection one by one<\/strong>, such as scanning an unsorted list of marks to find the highest score or running a standard linear search. In real life, this is like reading through an unorganized pile of exam papers page by page from top to bottom to find a specific student’s paper.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          \n
        • O(n<\/mi>l<\/mi>o<\/mi>g<\/mi>n<\/mi><\/mrow>nlogn<\/annotation><\/semantics><\/math>) \u2014 Log-Linear Time:<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n

          Slightly slower than linear time<\/strong>, this growth rate combines linear iterations across data with logarithmic splitting<\/strong> to form the optimal speed for general sorting operations. It represents efficient divide-and-conquer algorithms like Merge Sort <\/strong>and Quick Sort,<\/strong> which divide large datasets into smaller sub-problems, sort them, and combine them back together far more efficiently than basic loops. In everyday life, this is like organizing a huge stack of messy papers by first splitting them into small manageable piles, sorting each small pile individually, and then merging the sorted piles back together.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

            \n
          • O(<\/strong>n<\/mi>2<\/mn><\/msup>n^2<\/annotation><\/semantics><\/math>) \u2014 Quadratic Time:<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n

            A steep performance curve where required operations grow as the square of the input size<\/strong>, meaning that doubling your input data quadruples the workload. This sharp spike usually happens when using nested loops to compare every item in a list<\/strong> against every other item such as in Bubble Sort<\/strong>, causing tiny datasets of ten items to finish instantly while a million items explode into a trillion operations that freeze your system. In real life, this is like bringing a group of people into a room and having every single person shake hands with every other person individually to make sure everyone has met.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

              \n
            • O(<\/strong>2<\/mn>n<\/mi><\/msup>2^n<\/annotation><\/semantics><\/math>) \u2014 Exponential Time:<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n

              A dangerous growth rate where the total workload doubles with every single item added to the input size<\/strong>. This explosive behavior commonly appears in naive recursive algorithms that attempt to solve a problem by blindly testing every possible subset or combination, such as calculating Fibonacci numbers recursively<\/strong> without saving previous answers, making it completely unusable for anything beyond tiny inputs. In everyday life, this is like trying to break a combination padlock by testing every possible sequence of numbers one by one until you hit the right one.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                \n
              • O(<\/strong>n<\/mi>!<\/mo><\/mrow>n!<\/annotation><\/semantics><\/math>) \u2014 Factorial Time:<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n

                The absolute slowest complexity class<\/strong>, where operations grow at an astronomical rate by calculating every possible permutation of a dataset. A famous example is solving the Travelling Salesperson Problem<\/strong> through pure brute force, where checking every potential route for just thirteen cities generates billions of calculations, rendering the algorithm useless on modern hardware for inputs larger than twelve. In real life, this is like planning a vacation across several cities and writing down every single possible order in which you could visit those cities to calculate which route is the shortest.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                <\/p>\n\n\n\n

                Best, Average, and Worst Cases<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

                When you run a piece of code, its actual speed doesn’t just depend on how many items you feed into it. It also depends heavily on how those items are arranged right when the program starts. Because input data can arrive in any state imaginable, computer scientists do not measure code using just one fixed number. Instead, we evaluate algorithms using three distinct performance scenarios – the best case<\/strong>, the average case, and the worst case.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

                  \n
                • Best Case \u2014 Big Omega (<\/strong>\u03a9):<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n

                  Big Omega <\/strong>(\u03a9) represents the lower bound of an algorithm’s execution time, describing the absolute fastest scenario<\/strong> possible under ideal input conditions. It guarantees that the algorithm will take at least<\/em> this many steps, though it will usually take more.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                  For example, in an unsorted list of 1,000 items, Linear Search hits its best case if the target number is the very first element, finishing instantly in a single step with a complexity of \u03a9<\/strong>(1). Software engineers rarely rely on Big Omega<\/strong> alone because best-case performance can be deceptive, as even an inefficient algorithm can get lucky on a single run.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                    \n
                  • Average Case \u2014 Big Theta (\u03b8):<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n

                    Big Theta<\/strong> (\u03b8<\/strong>) represents the tight bound of an algorithm’s execution time, describing its expected performance under normal, everyday input conditions. It indicates that the algorithm will regularly take roughly<\/em> this many steps during typical operations. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

                    For example, when searching an unsorted list of 1,000 items, the target number will usually lie somewhere near the middle, requiring you to inspect roughly half the dataset (n<\/mi>\/<\/mi>2<\/mn><\/mrow>n\/2<\/annotation><\/semantics><\/math>) for an average-case complexity of \u03b8<\/strong>(n<\/mi>n<\/annotation><\/semantics><\/math>). Big Theta<\/strong> is essential for developers because it offers the most realistic picture of how code behaves under standard daily traffic.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
                      \n
                    • Worst Case \u2014 Big O (<\/strong>O<\/mi>O<\/annotation><\/semantics><\/math>):<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n

                      Big O (O<\/mi>O<\/annotation><\/semantics><\/math>) represents the upper bound of an algorithm’s execution time, describing the absolute slowest and most demanding scenario possible. It provides a strict guarantee that the algorithm will take at most<\/em> this many steps, but may take fewer. In our Linear Search<\/strong> example, the worst-case scenario happens when the target item is at the very end of the 1,000-item list or completely missing, forcing the program to check every single element for a worst-case complexity of O(<\/strong>n<\/mi>n<\/annotation><\/semantics><\/math>)<\/strong> . Big O is the primary industry<\/strong> standard because preparing for the worst-case scenario ensures system stability when handling traffic spikes or unoptimized data.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                      For example, you already have an interactive sticky tab on the exact page where your friend’s section starts. Regardless of whether the book has 10 pages or 10,000 pages, you open directly to that bookmark in a single step.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                      <\/p>\n\n\n\n

                      Now that we know how to measure execution speed, let me shift gears to the second half of the efficiency equation: memory space<\/strong>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                      What is Space Complexity?<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

                      Space Complexity<\/strong> measures the total amount of memory space an algorithm needs to run to completion as the input size (n<\/mi>n<\/annotation><\/semantics><\/math>) increases. Just like time complexity counts operations instead of seconds, space complexity counts memory units, like variables, arrays, and call stacks, instead of megabytes.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                      There are two main parts to consider when measuring memory:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                        \n
                      • Input Space:<\/strong> The memory required to store the original data given to the program (like an input array of 10,000 numbers).<\/li>\n\n\n\n
                      • Auxiliary Space:<\/strong> The extra or temporary memory space created by the algorithm while solving the problem (like temporary loops, storage arrays, or call stacks).<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n

                        In practical software engineering, we focus heavily on Auxiliary Space<\/strong> because the input size is often out of our control, but the extra memory our code creates is entirely up to us.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                        Common Space Complexity Categories<\/h4>\n\n\n\n
                          \n
                        • O(<\/strong>1<\/mn>1<\/annotation><\/semantics><\/math>) Constant Space:<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n

                          The algorithm uses a fixed amount of extra memory regardless of input size. For example, finding the largest number in a list using a single max_value<\/code> variable requires the exact same extra memory whether the list has 10 items or 1,000,000 items. In real life, this is like keeping track of a running total on a sticky note, no matter how many numbers you add up, you only need that one piece of paper.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                            \n
                          • O(<\/strong>n<\/mi>n<\/annotation><\/semantics><\/math>) Linear Space:<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n

                            The extra memory required grows in direct proportion to the input size n<\/mi>n<\/annotation><\/semantics><\/math>. For example, if you duplicate an input array of n<\/mi>n<\/annotation><\/semantics><\/math> items or use a recursive function that builds a call stack n<\/mi>n<\/annotation><\/semantics><\/math> levels deep, memory usage scales linearly. In the real world, this is like making a photocopy of every single document in a stack. If you get 50 new documents, you need 50 new sheets of paper to copy them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
                              \n
                            • O(<\/strong>n<\/mi>2<\/mn><\/msup>n^2<\/annotation><\/semantics><\/math>) Quadratic Space:<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n

                              The required memory grows as the square of the input size, usually happening when creating two-dimensional grids or tables based on n<\/mi>n<\/annotation><\/semantics><\/math>. For example, creating an n<\/mi>\/<\/mi>t<\/mi>i<\/mi>m<\/mi>e<\/mi>s<\/mi>n<\/mi><\/mrow>n\/timesn<\/annotation><\/semantics><\/math> matrix to map relationships between n<\/mi>n<\/annotation><\/semantics><\/math> social network users requires n<\/mi>2<\/mn><\/msup>n^2<\/annotation><\/semantics><\/math> memory slots. In real life, this is like building a seating chart grid where every person in a room needs a dedicated row and column to track who they have met.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                              Difference Between Time and Space Complexity-<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
                              Feature<\/strong><\/td>Time Complexity<\/strong><\/td>
                              Space Complexity<\/strong>
                              <\/td><\/tr>
                              Definition<\/strong><\/td>Measures how the execution time<\/strong> of an algorithm grows as the input size (n<\/mi>n<\/annotation><\/semantics><\/math>) increases.<\/td>Measures how the total memory space<\/strong> required by an algorithm grows as the input size (n<\/mi>n<\/annotation><\/semantics><\/math>) increases.<\/td><\/tr>
                              What it Counts<\/strong><\/td>Number of fundamental operations or steps<\/strong> performed by the CPU.<\/td>Number of memory units<\/strong> (variables, arrays, call stack frames) allocated in RAM.<\/td><\/tr>
                              Primary Focus<\/strong><\/td>Optimizing CPU performance and preventing system lag or freezes.<\/td>Preventing memory leaks, out-of-memory errors, and system crashes.<\/td><\/tr>
                              Key Distinction<\/strong><\/td>Evaluates execution speed regardless of processor hardware.<\/td>Splits into Input Space<\/strong> (original data) and Auxiliary Space<\/strong> (extra temporary data).<\/td><\/tr>
                              Real-World Trade-Off<\/strong><\/td>Reduced by using extra memory techniques like Caching<\/strong> and Memoization<\/strong>.<\/td>Reduced by recalculating data on the fly at the expense of extra CPU processing time.<\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

                              Note :<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n

                              Caching:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

                              Storing frequently accessed data in a temporary, high-speed storage location (like RAM or local disk) so future requests for that same data can be served faster. In real life, this is like keeping your most-used kitchen spices right on the countertop instead of walking back to the pantry every time.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                              Memoization:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

                              A specific form of caching used in recursive programming where you store the results of expensive function calls in a lookup table (like a dictionary or array). When the function is called again with the same inputs, it simply returns the saved result instead of recalculating it, turning an exponential O(2<\/mn>n<\/mi><\/msup>2^n<\/annotation><\/semantics><\/math>) algorithm into a linear O(n<\/mi>n<\/annotation><\/semantics><\/math>) one.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                              <\/p>\n\n\n\n

                              Following is the Time and Space Complexity<\/strong> of all the Sorting Algorithms<\/strong>:<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n
                              Algorithm<\/th>\n Best Time<\/th>\n Average Time<\/th>\n Worst Time<\/th>\n Space Complexity<\/th>\n <\/tr>\n <\/thead>\n
                              Bubble Sort<\/b><\/td>\n O(n)<\/td>\n O(n\u00b2)<\/td>\n O(n\u00b2)<\/td>\n O(1)<\/td>\n <\/tr>\n
                              Selection Sort<\/b><\/td>\n O(n\u00b2)<\/td>\n O(n\u00b2)<\/td>\n O(n\u00b2)<\/td>\n O(1)<\/td>\n <\/tr>\n
                              Insertion Sort<\/b><\/td>\n O(n)<\/td>\n O(n\u00b2)<\/td>\n O(n\u00b2)<\/td>\n O(1)<\/td>\n <\/tr>\n
                              Merge Sort<\/b><\/td>\n O(n log n)<\/td>\n O(n log n)<\/td>\n O(n log n)<\/td>\n O(n)<\/td>\n <\/tr>\n
                              Quick Sort<\/b><\/td>\n O(n log n)<\/td>\n O(n log n)<\/td>\n O(n\u00b2)<\/td>\n O(log n)<\/td>\n <\/tr>\n
                              Heap Sort<\/b><\/td>\n O(n log n)<\/td>\n O(n log n)<\/td>\n O(n log n)<\/td>\n O(1)<\/td>\n <\/tr>\n <\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n\n\n\n

                              <\/p>\n\n\n\n

                              We always have to remember that writing efficient software isn’t about memorizing complex math formulas, it’s about understanding how your code behaves when scaled up. Writing efficient software ultimately comes down to a shift in mindset. Once you start seeing your code not just as a set of instructions, but as a system that consumes resources, Big O becomes second nature. By keeping time and space complexity in mind while designing algorithms, you’ll write code that is clean, fast, and scalable<\/strong>! As you write your next project, take a step back and ask yourself: What happens to this code when n reaches a million<\/strong>?<\/em> That single habit will transform the way you build software.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                              I hope you found this guide helpful. Happy coding!<\/strong><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

                              Understanding Algorithmic Efficiency: Time vs Space Complexity Imagine you are writing a simple program for a college assignment to sort […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"site-sidebar-layout":"default","site-content-layout":"","ast-site-content-layout":"default","site-content-style":"default","site-sidebar-style":"default","ast-global-header-display":"","ast-banner-title-visibility":"","ast-main-header-display":"","ast-hfb-above-header-display":"","ast-hfb-below-header-display":"","ast-hfb-mobile-header-display":"","site-post-title":"disabled","ast-breadcrumbs-content":"","ast-featured-img":"","footer-sml-layout":"","ast-disable-related-posts":"","theme-transparent-header-meta":"","adv-header-id-meta":"","stick-header-meta":"","header-above-stick-meta":"","header-main-stick-meta":"","header-below-stick-meta":"","astra-migrate-meta-layouts":"default","ast-page-background-enabled":"default","ast-page-background-meta":{"desktop":{"background-color":"var(--ast-global-color-5)","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""},"tablet":{"background-color":"","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""},"mobile":{"background-color":"","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""}},"ast-content-background-meta":{"desktop":{"background-color":"var(--ast-global-color-4)","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""},"tablet":{"background-color":"var(--ast-global-color-4)","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""},"mobile":{"background-color":"var(--ast-global-color-4)","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""}},"footnotes":""},"categories":[66,49],"tags":[82,80,59,55,78,72,64,69,75,83,56,79,58,81],"class_list":["post-199","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-algorithms","category-data-structures","tag-average-case","tag-best-case","tag-big-o-notation","tag-bubble-sort","tag-heap-sort","tag-insertion-sort","tag-learning-to-code","tag-merge-sort","tag-quick-sort","tag-selection-sort","tag-sorting-algorithms","tag-space-complexity","tag-time-complexity","tag-worst-case"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/blog.csfree.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/199","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/blog.csfree.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/blog.csfree.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blog.csfree.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blog.csfree.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=199"}],"version-history":[{"count":11,"href":"https:\/\/blog.csfree.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/199\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":215,"href":"https:\/\/blog.csfree.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/199\/revisions\/215"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/blog.csfree.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=199"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blog.csfree.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=199"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blog.csfree.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=199"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}