On Jun 3, 2005, at 4:47 PM, Adrian Hey wrote:
On Thursday 02 Jun 2005 10:18 am, Jean-Philippe Bernardy wrote:
The definition of the Set datatype being
... [Something strict in all components] It seems you're out of luck when it comes to very large sets.
Also, since the structure is strict, it makes little sense to support 4-million-element sets.
I'd be interested to know why you say that. What would you use instead if you needed 4-million-element sets?
Replace "4 million" by, say, 2^32 or 2^64 and I think the point stands. The set must fit in your addressable memory, and can thus be counted by a similar-sized Int. Note also that set implementations which cache the size locally will have this property in general, whether the rest of the structure is strict or not---we'll at least have to compute how many insertions and deletions have occurred, and left the thunks kicking around if we haven't actually performed them completely yet. -Jan-Willem Maessen
The AVL trees in my implementation are strict and perfectly capable of supporting such sets. Same should be true of Data.Set too AFAICS.
Regards -- Adrian Hey _______________________________________________ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users