Return to Answer

I guess it's quite good in 22 minutes.

1.

Hashtable<Integer, Integer> myTable = new Hashtable<Integer, Integer>();

Instead of the Hashtable use HashMap, but you use it like a Set (same key and value, so value is unused), so use a HashSet instead. See: Differences between HashMap and Hashtable?

1. I would use a longer variable names than A. Longer names would make the code more readable since readers don't have to decode the abbreviations every time and when they write/maintain the code don't have to guess which abbreviation the author uses. Furthermore, usual Java variable names are camelCase, with lowercase first letter. (See: Effective Java, 2nd edition, Item 56: Adhere to generally accepted naming conventions)

2. myTable could have a more descriptive name.

3. I've removed everything which does not change minVal's value:

int minVal=0;
...
for(int i : A){
 if(i<minVal && i>0){
 minVal = i;
 }
 ...
}

If I'm right the condition of the if statement is always false. If you substitute minVal's initial value, you get this:

i < 0 && i > 0

which is false, so minVal's value never can be changed.

1. I'd put a guard clause inside the for to get rid of the negative values and save some memory in the set:

    for (int i: A) {
    if (i < 0) {
    continue;
    }
    set.add(i);
    }
   

1. If you want to save some memory with big, non-repetitive input arrays you could use a new BitSet(A.length).

I guess it's quite good in 22 minutes.

1.

Hashtable<Integer, Integer> myTable = new Hashtable<Integer, Integer>();

Instead of the Hashtable use HashMap, but you use it like a Set (same key and value, so value is unused), so use a HashSet instead. See: Differences between HashMap and Hashtable?

1. I would use a longer variable names than A. Longer names would make the code more readable since readers don't have to decode the abbreviations every time and when they write/maintain the code don't have to guess which abbreviation the author uses. Furthermore, usual Java variable names are camelCase, with lowercase first letter. (See: Effective Java, 2nd edition, Item 56: Adhere to generally accepted naming conventions)

2. myTable could have a more descriptive name.

3. I've removed everything which does not change minVal's value:

int minVal=0;
...
for(int i : A){
 if(i<minVal && i>0){
 minVal = i;
 }
 ...
}

If I'm right the condition of the if statement is always false. If you substitute minVal's initial value, you get this:

i < 0 && i > 0

which is false, so minVal's value never can be changed.

1. I'd put a guard clause inside the for to get rid of the negative values and save some memory in the set:

    for (int i: A) {
    if (i < 0) {
    continue;
    }
    set.add(i);
    }
   

1. If you want to save some memory with big, non-repetitive input arrays you could use a new BitSet(A.length).

Hashtable<Integer, Integer> myTable = new Hashtable<Integer, Integer>();

Instead of the Hashtable use HashMap, but you use it like a Set (same key and value, so value is unused), so use a HashSet instead. See: Differences between HashMap and Hashtable?

1. I would use a longer variable names than A. Longer names would make the code more readable since readers don't have to decode the abbreviations every time and when they write/maintain the code don't have to guess which abbreviation the author uses. Furthermore, usual Java variable names are camelCase, with lowercase first letter. (See: Effective Java, 2nd edition, Item 56: Adhere to generally accepted naming conventions)

2. myTable could have a more descriptive name.

3. I've removed everything which does not change minVal's value:

int minVal=0;
...
for(int i : A){
 if(i<minVal && i>0){
 minVal = i;
 }
 ...
}

If I'm right the condition of the if statement is always false. If you substitute minVal's initial value, you get this:

i < 0 && i > 0

which is false, so minVal's value never can be changed.

1. I'd put a guard clause inside the for to get rid of the negative values and save some memory in the set:

    for (int i: A) {
    if (i < 0) {
    continue;
    }
    set.add(i);
    }
   

I guess it's quite good in 22 minutes.

1.

Hashtable<Integer, Integer> myTable = new Hashtable<Integer, Integer>();

Instead of the Hashtable use HashMap, but you use it like a Set (same key and value, so value is unused), so use a HashSet instead. See: Differences between HashMap and Hashtable?

1. I would use a longer variable names than A. Longer names would make the code more readable since readers don't have to decode the abbreviations every time and when they write/maintain the code don't have to guess which abbreviation the author uses. Furthermore, usual Java variable names are camelCase, with lowercase first letter. (See: Effective Java, 2nd edition, Item 56: Adhere to generally accepted naming conventions)

2. myTable could have a more descriptive name.

3. I've removed everything which does not change minVal's value:

int minVal=0;
...
for(int i : A){
 if(i<minVal && i>0){
 minVal = i;
 }
 ...
}

If I'm right the condition of the if statement is always false. If you substitute minVal's initial value, you get this:

i < 0 && i > 0

which is false, so minVal's value never can be changed.

1. I'd put a guard clause inside the for to get rid of the negative values and save some memory in the set:

    for (int i: A) {
    if (i < 0) {
    continue;
    }
    set.add(i);
    }
   

1. If you want to save some memory with big, non-repetitive input arrays you could use a new BitSet(A.length) .

Hashtable<Integer, Integer> myTable = new Hashtable<Integer, Integer>();

Instead of the Hashtable use HashMap, but you use it like a Set (same key and value, so value is unused), so use a HashSet instead. See: Differences between HashMap and Hashtable?

1. I would use a longer variable names than A. Longer names would make the code more readable since readers don't have to decode the abbreviations every time and when they write/maintain the code don't have to guess which abbreviation the author uses. Furthermore, usual Java variable names are camelCase, with lowercase first letter. (See: Effective Java, 2nd edition, Item 56: Adhere to generally accepted naming conventions)

2. myTable could have a more descriptive name.

Hashtable<Integer, Integer> myTable = new Hashtable<Integer, Integer>();

Instead of the Hashtable use HashMap, but you use it like a Set (same key and value, so value is unused), so use a HashSet instead. See: Differences between HashMap and Hashtable?

1. I would use a longer variable names than A. Longer names would make the code more readable since readers don't have to decode the abbreviations every time and when they write/maintain the code don't have to guess which abbreviation the author uses. Furthermore, usual Java variable names are camelCase, with lowercase first letter. (See: Effective Java, 2nd edition, Item 56: Adhere to generally accepted naming conventions)

2. myTable could have a more descriptive name.

3. I've removed everything which does not change minVal's value:

int minVal=0;
...
for(int i : A){
 if(i<minVal && i>0){
 minVal = i;
 }
 ...
}

If I'm right the condition of the if statement is always false. If you substitute minVal's initial value, you get this:

i < 0 && i > 0

which is false, so minVal's value never can be changed.

1. I'd put a guard clause inside the for to get rid of the negative values and save some memory in the set:

    for (int i: A) {
    if (i < 0) {
    continue;
    }
    set.add(i);
    }