I like it, although I didn't take the time to read it all. At first based on the URL I thought maybe Google Itself had taken notice and written this webpage, but then I realized not, it's a subdomain under google.com. It's a smaller reimplementation of the library? With some creative variations in the API. Does it work as well? That's the key criterium to me.
The introduction could but does not say why libJudy is special. In my mind it has to do with the iron-clad by-expanse (radix) approach to decoding keys (indexes), which is infinitely extensible, coupled with all the pragmatic tricks employed in the original code to as portably as possible make the radix method practical, in fact extremely efficient, in time and space. Digital trees (tries) were always dissed in the past as inherently inefficient, and we proved that's not true, undermining decades of complicated work on optimizing the performance of non-radix (by-population) trees of many kinds. Unfortunately being R&D engineers rather than academicians, we never "published our work" other than the source code, which relegated libJudy to the dusty corners of computer history when HP canceled the project. In your reimplementation, did you study the existing code (difficult I know), or just recreate the interface but probably not as efficiently? Cheers, Alan Silverstein ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Gaining the trust of online customers is vital for the success of any company that requires sensitive data to be transmitted over the Web. Learn how to best implement a security strategy that keeps consumers' information secure and instills the confidence they need to proceed with transactions. http://p.sf.net/sfu/oracle-sfdevnl _______________________________________________ Judy-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/judy-devel
