On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 10:55 PM, João Valverde<backu...@netcabo.pt> wrote: > Aahz wrote: >> >> In article <mailman.2139.1245994218.8015.python-l...@python.org>, >> Tom Reed <tomree...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> >>> Why no trees in the standard library, if not as a built in? I searched >>> the archive but couldn't find a relevant discussion. Seems like a glaring >>> omission considering the batteries included philosophy, particularly >>> balanced binary search trees. No interest, no good implementations, >>> something other reason? Seems like a good fit for the collections module. >>> Can anyone shed some light? >>> >> >> What do you want such a tree for? Why are dicts and the bisect module >> inadequate? Note that there are plenty of different tree implementations >> available from either PyPI or the Cookbook. >> > > A hash table is very different to a BST. They are both useful. The bisect > module I'm not familiar with, I'll have to look into that, thanks. > > I have found pyavl on the web, it does the job ok, but there no > implementations for python3 that I know of.
> Simple example usage case: Insert string into data structure in sorted order > if it doesn't exist, else retrieve it. That's pretty much the bisect module in a nutshell. It manipulates a sorted list using binary search. Cheers, Chris -- http://blog.rebertia.com -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list