<?xml version="1.0" encoding="ISO-8859-1"?>

<!DOCTYPE message PUBLIC
  "-//MLarc//DTD MLarc output files//EN"
  "../../mlarc.dtd"[
  <!ATTLIST message
    listname CDATA #REQUIRED
    title CDATA #REQUIRED
  >
]>

  <?xml-stylesheet href="../../mlarc.xsl" type="text/xsl"?>


<message 
  url="2003/11/6ad97ddd5029978bbf694bfcf1b4b7ba"
  from="Samuel Lacas &lt;Samuel.Lacas@t...&gt;"
  author="Samuel Lacas"
  date="2003-11-07T15:44:31"
  subject="Re: [Caml-list] Efficient and canonical set representation?"
  prev="2003/11/3609cc72597a8a20efdcae335433c69f"
  next="2003/11/184f6a940f38b467106a0ab10f62e65d"
  prev-in-thread="2003/11/3609cc72597a8a20efdcae335433c69f"
  next-in-thread="2003/11/9154764be7c671c358f3a9c80b98d866"
  prev-thread="2003/11/810f9d2fb53a5d64dcf1e65d5252ea26"
  next-thread="2003/11/da696d358ae593a66f88c4f96053e5dc"
  root="../../"
  period="month"
  listname="caml-list"
  title="Archives of the Caml mailing list">

<thread subject="RE: [Caml-list] Efficient and canonical set representation?">
<msg 
  url="2003/11/3609cc72597a8a20efdcae335433c69f"
  from="Fred Smith &lt;fsmith@m...&gt;"
  author="Fred Smith"
  date="2003-11-07T15:27:37"
  subject="RE: [Caml-list] Efficient and canonical set representation?">
<msg 
  url="2003/11/6ad97ddd5029978bbf694bfcf1b4b7ba"
  from="Samuel Lacas &lt;Samuel.Lacas@t...&gt;"
  author="Samuel Lacas"
  date="2003-11-07T15:44:31"
  subject="Re: [Caml-list] Efficient and canonical set representation?">
<msg 
  url="2003/11/9154764be7c671c358f3a9c80b98d866"
  from="Eray Ozkural &lt;exa@k...&gt;"
  author="Eray Ozkural"
  date="2003-11-08T16:50:48"
  subject="Re: [Caml-list] Efficient and canonical set representation?">
</msg>
</msg>
</msg>
</thread>

<contents>
Fred Smith a écrit 2.2K le Fri, Nov 07, 2003 at 10:27:25AM -0500:
# 
# I guess what you're looking for are sorted arrays:
#   1) O(log n) lookup and insertion via binary search
#   2) O(n) union and intersection are simple
#   3) Equal sets are represented by structurally equivalent objects.
# 
# -Fred

Hmm, except that, if I'm not wrong, it was required the structure to
hold any kind of object. Sorted arrays require the elements to be
sortable. Using the hash of the objects may be an answer ?

sL

-------------------
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

</contents>

</message>

