Browse thread
[Caml-list] looping recursion
[
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: | james woodyatt <jhw@w...> |
| Subject: | Re: [Caml-list] kaplan-okasaki-tarjan deque (was "looping recursion") |
On 30 Jul 2004, at 14:20, brogoff wrote: > > BTW, what did your comparisons tell you? It told me that my implementation was enough faster that it was worth the price of having to convert between deques and lists in order to marshall them to disk or on the wire, with noticeable savings even after that. I can't remember the numbers right now. At one time, I thought it would be worth the effort of writing an academic paper on the subject, but I never learned how to write an academic paper so it will get published. So I haven't tried. Sigh. One of the questions that remains unanswered is how much time my implementation of Kaplan-Okasaki-Tarjan wastes being inefficient about handling the fixed size buffers. My gut tells me there's room for improvement there, but not enough to overcome the advantage my implementation has over it. I need to measure that. $B!=(B $B!h(B ------------------- To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/ Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners