• cadekat@pawb.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      This looks like O(n), because you don’t include constants when calculating Big-O. It’s still ~26 times slower than the implementation without the inner loop.

      This looks like O(n^2) because of the sub.

      I was right the first time. sub is “substring” and not “substitute”.