Isn't a stack O(1) time for push & pop and O(n) space? What is the tradeoff being made here, where both space and time complexity increased?

Or, am I missing something about the meaning of "n + O(log)", where the 'n' is not inside an 'O'. I don't really know what "n + O(log)" means exactly.

On Wed, Sep 2, 2020 at 12:21 PM David Feuer <david.feuer@gmail.com> wrote:
Typical stacks, queues, and deques are designed to have O(1) operations. These ones experiment in a different direction.

On Wed, Sep 2, 2020, 12:19 AM ☂Josh Chia (謝任中) <joshchia@gmail.com> wrote:
Could you elaborate on what the package does? The description is "Stacks, queues, and deques that take n + O(log n) space at the cost of having amortized O(log n) time complexity for basic operations." But why is it a 'cost' to have O(log n) instead of O(n) cost for basic operations on list-like structures (such as insert and delete presumably)? So, I didn't understand what the package is for.

Do you mean "take amortized O(log n) time for basic operations at the cost of n + O(log n) space"? Or is it something else I didn't imagine?



On Wed, Sep 2, 2020 at 4:17 AM David Feuer <david.feuer@gmail.com> wrote:
I am pleased to release the second version of the compact-sequences
package, now with deques!

Changes:
* Add deques.
* Change operator precedence.
* Add a test suite. Thanks to David Himmelstrup for setting up the
test and CI framework.
* Clean up internals somewhat.
* Add a proof of amortized bounds for the stack implementation.
Thanks, Li-Yao Xia.

There are still plenty of things to work on, and help is always welcome.

David Feuer
_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
To (un)subscribe, modify options or view archives go to:
http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Only members subscribed via the mailman list are allowed to post.