(Hope this isn't a disappointment, but this was implemented already in v0.3.)
On Sat, Aug 2, 2014 at 10:59 AM, Ivar Nesje <[email protected]> wrote: > Note that we're not lazy, but we know that contributing to Julia is highly > addictive. We want more people to look at Base with a critical eye in order > to discover inconsistencies like this. > > If you don't want to try, the fix will be committed within an hour. > > Ivar > > kl. 18:30:55 UTC+2 lørdag 2. august 2014 skrev Stefan Karpinski følgende: >> >> Would you be willing to take a crack at making a pull request? This >> should be a one-liner, somewhere in the base/set.jl file with the obvious >> definition. >> >> >> On Sat, Aug 2, 2014 at 10:04 AM, Ed Scheinerman <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> I work a good deal with Set objects. When I found the sizehint >>> function, I thought this would be useful to use as the data structure >>> supporting my sets would be pre-allocated to be large enough for what I >>> anticipated putting therein. But sizehint doesn't apply to Set objects: >>> >>> julia> A = Set() >>> Set{Any}() >>> >>> julia> sizehint(A,1000) >>> ERROR: no method sizehint(Set{Any},Int64) >>> >>> It appears that, under the hood, Set objects are built on top of Dict >>> objects. So one can do this: >>> >>> julia> sizehint(A.dict,1000) >>> Dict{Any,Nothing}() >>> >>> But if the implementation of Set changes, this breaks. >>> >>> So I'm voicing all this to request that sizehint(Set) be implemented. >>> >>> >>> >>
