Editorial Mistake in the Explanation for Problem 440. K-th Smallest in Lexicographical Order

[Mehamoodshaik]

LeetCode Username

mehamoodshaik

Problem Number, Title, and Link

440. K-th Smallest in Lexicographical Order https://leetcode.com/problems/k-th-smallest-in-lexicographical-order/

Bug Category

Editorial

Bug Description

In the editorial for Problem 440. K-th Smallest in Lexicographical Order, there is a mistake in the explanation regarding the children of numbers in lexicographical order.

Incorrect statement:

"For example, the number 1 has children 10, 11, 12, ..., up to 19. Similarly, 2 has children 20, 21, ..., up to 19."

Correction:

"For example, the number 1 has children 10, 11, 12, ..., up to 19. Similarly, 2 has children 20, 21, ..., up to 29."

The mistake lies in the fact that the children of 2 should go up to 29, not 19. This could cause confusion for users trying to understand the lexicographical structure.

Language Used for Code

None

Code used for Submit/Run operation

No response

Expected behavior

Correction:
"For example, the number 1 has children 10, 11, 12, ..., up to 19. Similarly, 2 has children 20, 21, ..., up to 29."

Screenshots

Additional context

No response

[exalate-issue-sync]

LeetCode Support commented: Hello,

Your reported issue has been relayed to our team for thorough investigation. We appreciate your patience as we work to address and resolve this matter. We will reach out to you when we have updates regarding the issue.

If you have any further questions or concerns in the meantime, please feel free to let us know.

Best regards,
LeetCode Support Team

[exalate-issue-sync]

Epiphania_Ekenimoh commented: Thank you for your time.

Your feedback has been used to enhance the problem. As a token of our appreciation, your LeetCode account has been credited with 100 LeetCoins.

If you have any more questions or additional feedback, please don't hesitate to let us know. Your continued support is invaluable to us!

Best regards,
The LeetCode Team