On Mon, 25 Jan 2016 21:42:29 +0000 "Lux, Jim (337C)" <james.p....@jpl.nasa.gov> wrote: > I think the original thought is that for some set of problems, a > brute force keep it all in RAM approach is as good, if not better, > than anything more sophisticated, if you're starting to put > development/test/etc costs.
It is true that the world has very powerful rocket engines now. I suspect that using a powerful enough rocket engine, you could move along an intermodal transport container down a highway without needing any wheels, the engines being powerful enough to overcome the friction of the roadway against the container. I am not sure, however, that this is a good idea. Regardless: any simple search structure you can name is as easy to use as a linear array or list in a modern language. Even in C++, the cost of using a reasonable fast-to-search data structure from the STL is no worse (in terms of API complexity) than using a vector and brute forcing your way through it. In other languages, it is even easier. So, there's really no point in not using a reasonable data structure -- it does not save any development or test costs, is not observably more complicated, and will save you many, many, many orders of magnitude in run time if you're dealing with a large amount of data. With that, I'll bow out of this. Perry -- Perry E. Metzger pe...@piermont.com _______________________________________________ Beowulf mailing list, Beowulf@beowulf.org sponsored by Penguin Computing To change your subscription (digest mode or unsubscribe) visit http://www.beowulf.org/mailman/listinfo/beowulf
