I'd like to complain about that, too ;) Louis Wasserman [email protected] http://profiles.google.com/wasserman.louis
On Sat, Feb 19, 2011 at 9:02 PM, Edward Kmett <[email protected]> wrote: > On Sat, Feb 19, 2011 at 7:27 PM, Sterling Clover <[email protected]>wrote: > >> On Sat, Feb 19, 2011 at 3:04 PM, Johan Tibell <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> > On Sat, Feb 19, 2011 at 11:58 AM, Louis Wasserman >> > <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> A couple thoughts: >> >> size takes O(n). That's just depressing. Really. >> > >> > This applies to all the container types. We could support O(1) size at >> > the cost of slowing down e.g lookup, insert, and delete a little bit. >> > I haven't measure how much yet. Would it be worth it? >> >> Getting a bit picky, but for the record, Data.Map and Data.Sequence >> provide O(1) size, and Data.HashTable I believe stores the information >> but doesn't expose it from its tiny API. That's not an argument either >> way for what a HashMap should do, however :-) >> > > NB: Data.IntMap, which Data.HashMap is based on, actually only provides > O(n) size. > > -Edward >
_______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list [email protected] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
