hi, I have used Fibonacci heaps I learnt that fib heaps have better time complexity (amortized O(1)) than binary heaps but I havent compared the performance of these two at same time
do u say that binary heap will perform better than a fibonacci heap ? for some algos say(Dijkstra ,Prim,..) I need the answer coz I'm working with heaps and I thought fibonacci heaps are best if binary heaps can do it well, then i will switch to binary heaps but as fibonacci heaps do lazy union, also fibonacci heaps can have dynamic size (no of nodes in heap) where as binary heaps which are represented as arrays have fixed size Also fibonacci heaps support union of heaps. Arun, On Sat, Aug 8, 2009 at 1:32 AM, Miroslav Balaz <[email protected]>wrote: > No there si no such function. > The best solution would be not to use priority queue, but other design. > If it wont work you can try to use splay tree. But it has big overhead. > Theoreticaly best would be fibbonaci heap but it heas even bigger overhead > than splay tree. > > 2009/8/7 mirosuaf <[email protected]> > > >> Hi, >> >> I have a question, as I am using STL priority_queues (quite a lot of >> them) and I need to perform many "join" operations... is there a >> function for that, to do it in O(lg n) time complexity for each of >> joins? >> >> Cheers, >> Miroslaw >> >> >> > > > > -- Potential is not what U have, its what U think U have!!! It is better to worn out than rust. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Algorithm Geeks" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/algogeeks -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
