On Wed, 30 Mar 2011 10:45:19 -0400, KennyTM~ <kenn...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Mar 30, 11 21:09, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
On Wed, 30 Mar 2011 04:55:52 -0400, KennyTM~ <kenn...@gmail.com> wrote:
No, the big difference is you can't move backward in a singly-linked
list. So, for instance, SList can only have linearRemove, while
(doubly-linked) List can have a constant-time remove.
I hate to point it out, but any linked list implementation, whether it
be single or double-linked, which does not support O(1) removal is 100%
useless. Might as well use an array.
Andrei, you really need to fix that.
-Steve
You can't O(1) remove an arbitrary range from an SList. O(1) removal is
possible only if you also know an iterator right before the range.
If you have a linked list of any type, and can't do O(1) insertion or
removal of a single element, then you have failed. Linked list's complete
advantage is arbitrary O(1) insertion and removal. Arrays have O(n)
insertion and removal, with random access. Why would I ever use SList in
its current form when it has the same complexity as but less features than
a builtin array?
And yes, you can, if you have a pointer to the element right before the
insertion/removal point. This is somewhat ugly, but is the cost of having
a singly linked list. I can guarantee anyone who knows what they are
doing is never going to use SList, unless they are just interested in a
stack type.
-Steve
