bukzor schrieb: > On Jan 4, 9:08 am, Sion Arrowsmith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: >> Hrvoje Niksic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >>> BTW if you're using C++, why not simply use std::set? >> Because ... how to be polite about this? No, I can't. std::set is >> crap. The implementation is a sorted sequence -- if you're lucky, >> this is a heap or a C array, and you've got O(log n) performance. >> But the real killer is that requirement for a std::set<T> is that >> T::operator< exists. Which means, for instance, that you can't >> have a set of complex numbers.... >> >> -- >> \S -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] --http://www.chaos.org.uk/~sion/ >> "Frankly I have no feelings towards penguins one way or the other" >> -- Arthur C. Clarke >> her nu becomeþ se bera eadward ofdun hlæddre heafdes bæce bump bump bump > > Why cant you implement < for complex numbers? Maybe I'm being naive, > but isn't this the normal definition? > a + bi < c + di iff sqrt(a**2 + b**2) < sqrt(c**2, d**2) > > How do you implement a set without sorting? > > Are you expecting better than O(log n)?
Of course, hashing does O(1) (most of the time, with a sane hash of course.) Diez -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
