> i haven't found avl to be slow, so i was interested in
> this.

It was slow in relation to other methods available.  That code wasn't
written to be fast.  It came out of a long ago Sunday afternoon
discussion I had with someone about data structures, from which we
ended up cobbling together a few different versions of transpose to
get some timings.  That was the only version that seems to have
survived, so that's the one you got ;-)


Reply via email to