Not a disappointment at all! I look forward to 0.3 being officially released. Thank you.
On Saturday, August 2, 2014 4:00:12 PM UTC-4, Kevin Squire wrote: > > (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] > <javascript:>> 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. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >
