On Monday, 18 August 2014 at 06:50:08 UTC, Paulo Pinto wrote:
On Sunday, 17 August 2014 at 21:09:04 UTC, monarch_dodra wrote:
On Sunday, 17 August 2014 at 18:54:27 UTC, Paulo Pinto wrote:
Hi,
I was wondering if it is possible to use the BinaryHeap store
like
the C++'s make_heap/pop_heap/push_heap functions.
I would like to port to D some A* C++ code I have which
rearranges the priorities on the underlying store, followed
by another
make_heap() call on the vector used as store.
Doing the same in D by calling again heapify() does not seem
to provide similar behavior.
Just curious about it, as I don't plan to invest too much
time on it.
Thanks,
Paulo
AFAIK, D's BinaryHeap works just like C++'s
make_heap/pop_heap/push_heap, except that it provides an
actual object you can interface with, which has font,
removeFront, removeAny and insert.
What exactly is the difference in behavior you are seeing?
Just different results that can be attributed to
implementation details, or fundamental differences?
It doesn't seem to like I change the store contents directly
under its feet
and recalling heapify again on the same store, like I am doing
in C++'s heap.
Sometimes I get a different sequence of data or just a crash.
I still need to make the D code reflect my latest C++ changes,
as the C++ code is what really matters in this hobby project,
there is where my focus has been lately.
The D version is more of a "playing around" thing.
As I said, I curious what the behavior is supposed to be.
Thanks,
Paulo
Weird. The behavior should be the same as C++'s. As I said, the
difference is that D gives you a "handle" object. This object
assumes you *don't* modify it's store under the hood, but as long
as you don't use the heap after a store modification, you should
be fine. Do you have a minimal test case?
