In binary trees they allow search in (0 l(og n)) eg sorted arrays get the eg techniques like divide and conquer .... thus this leads to a faster seraching since they allow for seraching T;hus arrays are faster thn liknked lists ..... In arrays in inserting or deleting is (0(n) ) thi s t in the middle its really slow...
linked lists -
- Bad at Random Access Problem: No direct access to elements.
Why it's bad: You can’t do list[10] in constant time like arrays.
Time complexity: O(n) to access the nth element.
Example: Scrolling to the 1,000th comment in a linked list takes 1,000 steps.
- Bad Cache Performance Problem: Nodes are scattered in memory.
Why it's bad: CPUs love contiguous memory (like arrays), which helps with prefetching and speed.
Result: Linked lists are slower due to frequent cache misses.
- High Memory Overhead Problem: Each node needs extra memory for a pointer/reference.
Why it's bad: A linked list uses more memory than an array for the same number of elements.
Example: A list of 1 million integers = 1 million pointers = extra 8MB+ memory (on 64-bit).
- Slower Search Problem: No way to "jump" to the correct place.
Why it's bad: You must traverse the list sequentially — O(n) for searching.
Contrast: Arrays allow binary search if sorted (O(log n)).
- Inefficient for Some Insert/Delete Cases Problem: You must find the node before the target to delete.
Why it's bad: Searching for that node is O(n) unless you already have a reference to it.
Also: Doubly linked lists have better delete flexibility but even more memory usage.