H. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Jon Fairbairn <jon.fairbairn <at> cl.cam.ac.uk> writes:
> > The idea in Haskell is not to think of stepping through the
> > array. Look at accumArray and ixmap.
>
> Thanks for your answer.
>
> But I can't really see how the calc-function can be written more efficiently
> with accumArray or ixmap, perhaps you can write it as an example?
Well, for your example, neither is needed since you could
write something like:
upb = 10000
listArray (1,upb) (repeat False)
//map (\n->(2^n,True)) [1..floor (logBase 2 $ fromIntegral upb)]
or
a = listArray (1,upb) (repeat False)
b = a//map (\n->(2^n,not (a!(2^n)))) [1..floor (logBase 2 $ fromIntegral upb)]
but the first one is obviously better,
so it depends on what you really want to do.
--
Jón Fairbairn [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.chaos.org.uk/~jf/Stuff-I-dont-want.html (updated 2007-05-07)
_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
