English version
Accueil     À propos     Téléchargement     Ressources     Contactez-nous    

Ce site est rarement mis à jour. Pour les informations les plus récentes, rendez-vous sur le nouveau site OCaml à l'adresse ocaml.org.

Browse thread
[Caml-list] "List.index" or "List.unique" functions?
[ Home ] [ Index: by date | by threads ]
[ Search: ]

[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
Date: 2004-05-01 (09:24)
From: skaller <skaller@u...>
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] List.rev
On Sat, 2004-05-01 at 18:32, Jon Harrop wrote:
> On Saturday 01 May 2004 09:10, skaller wrote:
> > Yet it is easy enough to say
> >
> > O(n) time and O(1) stack
> O(n) heap

Well, the output requires O(n) heap by nature of
the result..

> But why restrict yourself to asymptotic complexities... ;-)

Good question. one reason is that it's hard to do better
in a specification: you can't very well say 'this takes
1 second' :-)

However, perhaps you can say something for small n.

Usually this is a QOI issue. QOI = Quality of Implementation.
Meaning "not an issue for standardisation". QOI is important
of course -- we use Ocaml because of its high performance.

John Skaller, mailto:skaller@users.sf.net
voice: 061-2-9660-0850, 
snail: PO BOX 401 Glebe NSW 2037 Australia
Checkout the Felix programming language http://felix.sf.net

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