I notice a lot of people did theirs differently so I thought I'd explain what I did!

One of the things I noticed that led to my solution, was the fast that the next largest number, was 1 'sort' away from the number we had. What I mean is if we imagine our number as an array of its digits, the number we wanted was 1 swap away AND would make our 'array' more sorted than it was before!

This made me realize that a modified bubble sort was exactly what I was looking for! So below I conconted something loosely based on a bubble sort. It starts at the end of the number and moves backward seeing if it can make a swap. If it does, it returns the swapped value. If we make it to the beggining of the list we know there wasn't a larger number and simply return None!

## re: Daily Challenge #12 - Next Larger Number VIEW POST

TOP OF THREAD FULL DISCUSSIONI notice a lot of people did theirs differently so I thought I'd explain what I did!

One of the things I noticed that led to my solution, was the fast that the next largest number, was 1 'sort' away from the number we had. What I mean is if we imagine our number as an array of its digits, the number we wanted was 1 swap away AND would make our 'array' more sorted than it was before!

This made me realize that a modified bubble sort was exactly what I was looking for! So below I conconted something loosely based on a bubble sort. It starts at the end of the number and moves backward seeing if it can make a swap. If it does, it returns the swapped value. If we make it to the beggining of the list we know there wasn't a larger number and simply return

`None`

!I wanted to do it like this (in Erlang), but didn’t figure out how to. Nice.

I think you have a mistake:

`next_largest(351)`

should return`513`

, and you return`531`

.That’s where I gave up with the swapping approach.