Simon Marlow [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Any thumb rule for using arrays? I'm expecting access to be
O(1), it is right?
In GHC, yes.
(Shouldn't this really be required? I mean, the whole
*point* of using
arrays is to have O(1) random access, isn't it?)
Can we also rely on
Simon Marlow [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Can we also rely on destructive updates for the monadic arrays?
In GHC, yes :-)
Goodie!
One more question: I imagine arrays give an opportunity to optimize by
unboxing the contained type -- any chance of that? How much space
would an array of Chars
Any thumb rule for using arrays? I'm expecting access to be
O(1), it is right?
In GHC, yes.
Need to have a set of data, and I just want to get random
elements from that
Set, arrays seem like a good solution... am I right?
If you're building it once and doing lots of access, then
On Sunday 27 January 2002 05:36, Hal Daume III wrote:
For your last question (about reduction to hnf), use the attached
code; search the haskell mailing list for deepseq for more.
Thanks... I found myself trying to define a function
deepSeq :: [a]-[a]
to evaluate all the elements of the
Am I the only one who'd like to have some the function specified by
scan_and_fold f e xs= (scanl f e xs, foldl f e xs)
In the Lists library. Or is it there somewhere and I missed it?
What about:
pair (f,g) x = (f x, g x)
cross (f, g) = pair(f.fst, g.snd)
I kind of like point free style.
For your last question (about reduction to hnf), use the attached
code; search the haskell mailing list for deepseq for more.
--
Hal Daume III
Computer science is no more about computers| [EMAIL PROTECTED]
than astronomy is about telescopes. -Dijkstra | www.isi.edu/~hdaume
On Sun, 27
