On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 3:33 PM, Andy Fingerhut <andy.finger...@gmail.com>wrote:
> > I haven't done anything but think about it during commute time yet, but I > had been wondering in how many situations it might be useful to have a > string type that was something like Relaxed Radix Binary trees, in that > they can be concatenated and substring'd in O(log n) worst case time, and > yet substrings would only hold onto references of the parts that they > explicitly refer to, and perhaps a little bit more (but not the entire > original string). > "Ropes" have been around for a long time as an alternative to strings, with fast concatenation and splitting. RRB trees might be another, similar route to the same goal. I remember years ago hearing rave reports from people using Cedar (which used ropes as its default string data type), saying it was wonderful to have such a feature-rich string type (well, mainly they were excited about the fast concatenation), so yes, I think it would likely be useful. As I recall, back in 2007, the ICFP Programming Contest was pretty much impossible to solve unless your language had a rope implementation: http://save-endo.cs.uu.nl/ Ropes, like strings, used to be destructive, but I think most new implementations are immutable: Relevant link: http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/library/j-ropes/ -- -- 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 Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. 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 --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
