------- Comment #30 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2010-09-21 17:55 ------- More correctly (in the meanwhile went through a exchange at the beginning of this year), Howard stores the hash, which boils down to a memory requirement similar to that of the traditional doubly linked list scheme per Dinkum in the limit of high load factor, for small load factor is better because can use only one pointer instead of two for each bucket in the bucket list. All in all, if the requirements of throwing hash + erase complexity are combined, I don't think anything with a memory use similar to that of the singly linked schemes is possible.
Joaquin, I think Matt would be in favor of a motion asking a re-opening of the issue in Batavia, what do you think? -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41975