On Sun, Nov 04, 2007 at 07:56:36PM -0800, William Ahern wrote: > On Mon, Nov 05, 2007 at 03:29:34AM +0100, Marc Lehmann wrote: > > On Sun, Nov 04, 2007 at 06:00:56PM -0800, Christopher Layne <[EMAIL > > PROTECTED]> wrote: > <snip> > > > Which isn't really that big a deal as similar time is spent in the > > > present RB > > > implementation as it is. > > > > No, I still maintain that the RB tree is slower because its rebalancing > > operations are frequent and very complex. Heap code is trivial. Yes, they > > have the same asymptotic growth behaviour, but the practical cases are > > all very far away from infinity, and the hidden C in O(log n) is quite > > important. > > > > RB balancing isn't that complex. Maybe you're thinking of AVL trees? > > The problem with using heaps in network software is you must be careful > adversaries cannot dictate any of the parameters. Certainly when you're
Ignore this. I'm confusing heaps with hashes.... _______________________________________________ Libevent-users mailing list Libevent-users@monkey.org http://monkey.org/mailman/listinfo/libevent-users
