This is the mail archive of the guile@cygnus.com mailing list for the guile project.
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |
Chris.Bitmead@misys.com.au writes: > >So when worrying about the worst case, doing lots of insertions, > >deletions, ordering and the like, balanced trees are better, although > >they are not implemented by the guile-core? > > Worst case for balanced trees is an in-order insertion. That makes > lots of rebalancing of the tree. Unfortunately, in-order insertion > is a common case. > > On the other hand, provided a hash table has a truely random hash, > the worst case is so unlikely to happen it's not worth thinking > about. Worst case is still O(log(n)) for each insertion. -- Harvey J. Stein BFM Financial Research hjstein@bfr.co.il