On Fri, Feb 7, 2014 at 2:00 PM, Roy Smith <[email protected]> wrote: > In article <[email protected]>, > Dave Angel <[email protected]> wrote: > >> list does not promise better than O(1) behavior > > I'm not aware of any list implementations, in any language, that > promises better than O(1) behavior for any operations. Perhaps there is > O(j), where you just imagine the operation was performed?
I have a printer that executes in O(1/N) time, where N is the number of marbles the sysadmin (me!) has lost. The less sanity I have, the more printouts it produces. And the less printouts it produces, the more marbles I lose trying to figure out WHY? WHY? WHY?!? Okay, I'm done ranting about Windows and 1990s accounting packages and modern PostScript printers. ChrisA -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
