Yep, that's a good point. It'll involve a little copy-and-paste to implement this alternate way of looking for a slot efficiently, but probably worth it.
On Wed, Jan 27, 2010 at 12:31 PM, Dawid Weiss <dawid.we...@gmail.com> wrote: > But then -- the same thing applies to put; if you don't find the key > in the map and there is a removed slot on the lookup chain, you should > probably insert the key in there, instead of taking a new empty slot, > right? This is not strictly a bug, but wouldn't cause map growth (or > rehashing) if you have interleaved put/removes.
