apfelmus wrote: > [..] > > Persistent data structures are harder to come up with than ephemeral > ones, [...]
Yes, in some cases it's quite hard to find a persistent solution for a data structure that is rather trivial compared to its ephemeral counterpart. My question is: Is there a case, where finding a persistent solution that performs equally well is *impossible* rather than just harder? I mean might there be a case where (forced) persistence (as we have in pure Haskell) is a definite disadvantage in terms of big-O notation? Do some problems even move from P to NP in a persistent setting? Stephan -- Früher hieß es ja: Ich denke, also bin ich. Heute weiß man: Es geht auch so. - Dieter Nuhr _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
