On Mon, Nov 05, 2001 at 06:36:54PM +0100, Florian Hars wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 05, 2001 at 11:32:51AM +0100, Jean-Christophe Filliatre wrote:
> > Marcin 'Qrczak' Kowalczyk writes:
> >  > I need dictionaries indexed by ints which must be very fast.
> > 
> > To be  even more efficient, I'm  afraid you have to  follow your idea,
> > that is to inline this hash function in your own copy of hashtbl.ml.
> 
> Wouldn't the Patricia Trees (from the 
> "the-name-of-the-author-currently-escapes-me"-department :-)) mentioned on 
> http://www.lri.fr/~filliatr/software.en.html be useful in this case (unless 
> the problem needs the in-place update available with Hashtbl)? 
> The documentation claims that "The
>     performances are always better than the standard library's module
>     [Set], except for linear insertion (building a set by insertion of
>     consecutive integers)."

The standard library [Set] is a functional B tree, if i am not wrong, it is
quite fast, but depending on the apps, it will not be faster than the
hashtable, that's why we have the hashables.

Sven Luther
-------------------
Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs  FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/
To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr  Archives: http://caml.inria.fr