I'm assuming he means IO.inspect but I may be wrong.
On Wed, Feb 15, 2017 at 4:37 PM, Robert Virding wrote:
> How do you mean "when they are inspected"? If you do it then all functions
> which step through the keys would have to be fixed and some like *fold* and
> *map* could be very difficult t
How do you mean "when they are inspected"? If you do it then all functions
which step through the keys would have to be fixed and some like *fold* and
*map* could be very difficult to implement in an efficient manner. If you
don't do it for all then it is pointless.
Robert
On Monday, 13 Febru
If I dump a map to logs I don't care about its order, I only want it to be as
fast as possible. Logging already introduces a serious performance hit, and
sorting would make logging even more expensive performance wise.
As was mentioned previously if a map is small it's already sorted. So it wou
Good points, but isn't inspecting a map generally a development time
activity? Especially big maps?
Sometimes, optimizing people is the right thing to do. When you're looking
at big lists of ecto objects and working to pick out an ID, having things
in order is a big deal.
-bt
On Wed, Feb 15, 20
I believe it would be useful to not sort if there are very many keys as well. A
huge map would presumably be inspected in a short while, skipping keys after
the first few. Inspecting a huge map could become cpu/memory intensive, which I
would find surprising... anyways +1 from me
--
You recei
I did read all of it before I commented. I'm not sure if I'm going to output a
really large map that I want to wait for it to sort. I guess I might want to
wait. It would depend on why I want to sort. I guess I need to look at how I
usually use inspect. I normally know the keys I'm looking for a
Again, the question is the _display_ of the keys; absolutely nothing would
change about how the keys are stored.
"I propose always sorting the map keys *when they are inspected" *(emphasis
mine).
Please read back to the start of the thread if you care to comment.
On Wednesday, February 15,
Hey Amos
As I understand it the ordering of maps is an Erlang implementation detail
that is not to be relied upon. If you want an ordered dictionary a map
probably is not the correct data structure for you.
Cheers,
Louis
On Wed, 15 Feb 2017 at 14:35 Amos King wrote:
> Before jumping on this s
Hi Amos,
This is solely discussing the _display_ of the keys--not the storage.
On Wed, Feb 15, 2017 at 9:35 AM, Amos King wrote:
> Before jumping on this should we be asking why the decision was made to
> not sort if there are more than 32 keys? Maybe there is a performance
> concern, and if we
Before jumping on this should we be asking why the decision was made to not
sort if there are more than 32 keys? Maybe there is a performance concern,
and if we want sorted keys we should be sending a different message?
Amos King
Owner
Binary Noggin
http://binarynoggin.com #business
http://thisagi
10 matches
Mail list logo
