Clarification Required on find() Access Time in Exercises 1.5.4 and 1.5.3

[xzy2022]

In Exercise 1.5.4, it's noted that executing the find() function on a node at depth i results in i+1 accesses to the id[] array. This was particularly apparent when analyzing the example with the second pair input, 3 8, where executing find(3) resulted in two accesses since the parent of node 3 is node 4. However, there seems to be a contrasting scenario in Exercise 1.5.3, where the find() function on a node at the same depth i necessitates 2i+1 accesses.

This variance has caused some uncertainty, and I'm inclined to believe the formula from Exercise 1.5.3 might be the correct interpretation. Could there be a detail I've missed that explains this inconsistency, or is there a definitive correct approach among the two? I am seeking further clarification to comprehend the intended behavior of the find() function within these contexts

[reneargento]

You are correct, in the find() method we should count 2i + 1 accesses on depth i.
I updated exercise 1.5.4 to fix that: 62da660
Thanks for reporting this issue and for the contribution.