From: Brian H. <bri...@ql...> - 2003-05-19 20:58:24
|
On Mon, 19 May 2003, Nicolas Cannasse wrote: > But few comments here : > - reading verticaly the names of the data structures in a pain :) Yeah. There is a tradeoff there, when I start putting real data into it- horizontal structure names mean wide, irregular width, columns, and a much wider table. Vertical structure names make for regular width columns, and a much thinner table. But you're right, it's harder to read. > - I think we need more primitives, for example it's not specified that the > "index" access on arrays is O(1) , and actually prepend/append/insert/remove > are not valid operations on arrays since it is not resizable. Sorry. The data is not necessarily even *correct*- it's just a test file I'm running through my program. After the programm is more or less finished, we start filling in the data. I was just wondering if the HTML I was producing worked. > - we need more explanations than that. Version 2.0 is going to have comments. And classes- so we're not trying to compare linked lists with hash tables. And probably other bells and whistles. > > Here's how I see the thing : > > There is no direct comparison between the differents data structures, but > even a beginner can have a quick read at the list to understand about the > main differences between data structures. > I like the idea of table. Used properly, they allow the programmer to "these are the operations I'm most concerned with- what data structures are best to use?" I'll post the code here when it's in viewable form. Brian |