thank you for the idea. Here's how I extrapolate in terms of doing comparisons/experimentation:
If sorted-set does the sort in advance, then this would be a way to delay some of that work, but if my implementation is too terrible, then there's a chance that the sorted-set is more practical. That is, perhaps a sorted-set is able to do a complete sort in the same time (or less) that it takes the heap to just insert the elements. The first is, of course O(log(n)) (unless it uses more than one processor), and the latter in this structure is O(n), but maybe the constant is way too high. But here would be an interesting situation: what if all the Heap inserts do end up being faster, but popping every element off is slower because deleteMin()'s constant is so high? Well, then there's a cross-over point that would be nice to know about. It might be better to use the heap, when you only want, say, the top K things, but if you want the top K+1 things, than it's cheaper to just sort them all. Lastly, if a heap were found that trumps sorted-set construction when adding both insert time and the time to pop all elements, then it could make sense to implement sorted-set using a heap because of it's semi-laziness. Of course, things are seldom that simple. It could be the case that one data structure is better for some size problems and on some machines than the other, in which case both have their use. On Sun, Apr 19, 2009 at 1:34 PM, Mark Engelberg <mark.engelb...@gmail.com>wrote: > > I'm curious to know how this approach compares to using Clojure's > sorted sets or hash tables. > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
