On Mar 8, 2007, at 16:27 , David Roundy wrote:
The real issue for me is that DiffArrays only make any sense at all
if you
often update a subset of your array, which I never expect to do...
so even
if they were efficiently implemented to the point of zero overhead,
they
would gain me nothing, and that's almost certainly overly optimistic.
But that's not my understanding of what's *supposed* to be
happening: the point of DiffArrays is is not optimizing partial
updates, it's optimizing the head at the expense of any (by intent
few or none) references that might be held elsewhere. As such, if
there are no such references the DiffArray *should* get you cheap in-
place (destructive) updates.
It's possible that the current *implementation* is flawed in the way
you describe; if so, that should probably be brought up on the
libraries list, because the documentation and the intent seem to be
saying otherwise.
--
brandon s. allbery [linux,solaris,freebsd,perl] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
system administrator [openafs,heimdal,too many hats] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
electrical and computer engineering, carnegie mellon university KF8NH
_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe