On Tue, Aug 30, 2011 at 12:52, Jos Koot <jos.k...@telefonica.net> wrote:
> ** > You are stating: hash with bounded memory > Does that mean you will have a limit on the number of entries? > Not necessarily. It might grow, although I might limit it to logarithmic growth. Or the bound may be very large but unknown, and little memory should be used most of the time. > In that case a vector plus a current index might do, I think. > Gives you O(1) access to every element. > If the required number of elements may vary very much, a vector probably is > not a good idea, unless using resizable vectors, but that makes some > operations O(n). > A hash+vector would nearly do it, but in the end it might not get any simpler than a doubly linked list. I also need to move items at the end of the list too. I should add that this is not for production purpose, but for more "theoretical" properties, so I don't care much about a potential constant overhead per operation, but I care about how it would behave with an increasing number of items. Laurent
_________________________________________________ For list-related administrative tasks: http://lists.racket-lang.org/listinfo/users
