Browse thread
Data structure efficiency questions
-
David.Mentre@i...
-
Jean-Christophe Filliatre
- Stefan Monnier
-
Jean-Christophe Filliatre
[
Home
]
[ Index:
by date
|
by threads
]
[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
| Date: | -- (:) |
| From: | Stefan Monnier <monnier+lists/caml/news/@R...> |
| Subject: | Re: Data structure efficiency questions |
>>>>> "Jean-Christophe" == Jean-Christophe Filliatre <Jean-Christophe.Filliatre@lri.fr> writes:
> In his message of September 18, 2000, David=?iso-8859-1?Q?_Mentr=E9?= writes:
>> 1. Is the @ operator costly or is it implemented as a simple pointers
>> manipulation?
I'm not sure what you mean by "not costly" since the "pointer manipulation"
still requires to go down one of the lists.
> @ cannot be implemented as a simple pointer manipulation, because
> lists are persistent data structures. It means that l1 and l2 must
> remain the same lists after the evaluation of l1 @ l2.
You could of course have a list datatype as (pardon the SML syntax):
datatype 'a list = Nil | Cons of 'a * 'a list | @ of 'a list * 'a list
Although this probably wouldn't be described as "pointer manipulation".
Stefan