Some constructive criticism... I would review your explanations to see if any imprecise sentences can be replaced with more accurate definitions. I get that y

Some constructive criticism... I would review your explanations to see if any imprecise sentences can be replaced with more accurate definitions. I get that you're going for a friendly tone but many times, the more accurate definition is just as easy to read. For example this text: >In the case accessing an element within an array or hash, it takes 1 operation to perform. Thus, we can describe the complexity as O(1) for this code example. This is about as good as it gets for algorithm complexity. Of course, while O(1) runtime code is quite fast, it may often come at the expense of storage. It's clearer to say that O(1) means constant time access in relation to input size. The "1" doesn't mean one operation. The alternative explanations you wrote are actually misleading.