Browse thread
Labelling trees
[
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: | skaller <skaller@u...> |
| Subject: | Re: [Caml-list] Labelling trees |
On Fri, 2007-06-08 at 11:52 +0200, Till Varoquaux wrote: > On 6/8/07, skaller <skaller@users.sourceforge.net> wrote: > > On Thu, 2007-06-07 at 16:26 +0200, Till Varoquaux wrote: > > > True, but the hash required would be unstable. > > > > Hashing or comparing using the value of a term as a key > > is no good. It's too slow. > > Hashing doesn't read the whole structure, it can be parametrized to > read less data. Do you really see a performance boost using addresses > instead? I have no idea because you can't.. what I did see when i tried map terms to values (using hashtable) .. was a slowdown ;( -- John Skaller <skaller at users dot sf dot net> Felix, successor to C++: http://felix.sf.net