On 18/03/2010, at 9:49 AM, Matthias Görgens wrote: > Hi Peter, > > Interesting. Your skip lists do not need re-balancing, but they do > destructive updates. I wonder which factor outweighs the other in > practise.
Isn't destructive update a feature in this case? i.e. these skip lists are designed for shared, mutable state. You could also have an immutable implementation, and in both cases not needing to rebalance helps -- less contention in the first instance and more sharing in the second._______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
