Often when writing algorithms which involve set operations on small
enumerations, I start off using Data.Set. I soon find performance
requires rewriting that code to use bitwise operations. I miss the
nice interface of Data.Set and the type checking of using a proper
data type.
So, as
On Monday 03 April 2006 14:19, David F. Place wrote:
Often when writing algorithms which involve set operations on small
enumerations, I start off using Data.Set. I soon find performance
requires rewriting that code to use bitwise operations. I miss the
nice interface of Data.Set and the
On Apr 3, 2006, at 1:31 PM, Benjamin Franksen wrote:
wondered about the Ord instance. Wouldn't it be faster to compare
(word-) representations?
I thought about that some. Since the set representation is based
completely on the enumeration, it would be possible for the type
being
On 4/3/06, David F. Place [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Apr 3, 2006, at 1:31 PM, Benjamin Franksen wrote:
wondered about the Ord instance. Wouldn't it be faster to compare
(word-) representations?
I thought about that some. Since the set representation is based
completely on the
On Apr 3, 2006, at 5:38 PM, Jean-Philippe Bernardy wrote:
I don't think there is a requirement for the Ord class to be equal to
compare a b = compare (toAscList a) (toAscList b). I'd say it's safe
to simply compare the bits representation.
Hmm. OK.
Besides, I've integrated your module to
