I can think of ways of avoiding the cost cost of setting count to 0. For example, use a sparse array implementation, with a default value of 0.
Not sure that that would be wise, though. Basically what you do is avoid using counts for that case, I imagine. -- Raul On Thu, Mar 6, 2014 at 3:48 PM, Roger Hui <rogerhui.can...@gmail.com> wrote: >> Suppose M is really large and the cost of setting count to 0 is > prohibitive. How can you avoid that cost? >> (Not saying it's related to finding the min or the max). > > Well, what say you, collective wisdom of the J programming forum? > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
