On Sat, Feb 19, 2011 at 7:27 PM, Sterling Clover <s.clo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 19, 2011 at 3:04 PM, Johan Tibell <johan.tib...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > On Sat, Feb 19, 2011 at 11:58 AM, Louis Wasserman > > <wasserman.lo...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> A couple thoughts: > >> size takes O(n). That's just depressing. Really. > > > > This applies to all the container types. We could support O(1) size at > > the cost of slowing down e.g lookup, insert, and delete a little bit. > > I haven't measure how much yet. Would it be worth it? > > Getting a bit picky, but for the record, Data.Map and Data.Sequence > provide O(1) size, and Data.HashTable I believe stores the information > but doesn't expose it from its tiny API. That's not an argument either > way for what a HashMap should do, however :-) > NB: Data.IntMap, which Data.HashMap is based on, actually only provides O(n) size. -Edward
_______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
