On Mon, Jul 30, 2012 at 5:05 PM, Steven Bosscher wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 30, 2012 at 4:53 PM, Richard Guenther
> wrote:
>> No, but less space efficient and of comparable speed as sbitmap which
>> is also O(1).
>
> But iterating an sbitmap has worse complexity than sparseset.
Which is why I mentione
On Mon, Jul 30, 2012 at 5:14 PM, Richard Guenther
wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 30, 2012 at 5:05 PM, Steven Bosscher
> wrote:
>> On Mon, Jul 30, 2012 at 4:53 PM, Richard Guenther
>> wrote:
>>> No, but less space efficient and of comparable speed as sbitmap which
>>> is also O(1).
>>
>> But iterating an
On Mon, Jul 30, 2012 at 4:53 PM, Richard Guenther
wrote:
> No, but less space efficient and of comparable speed as sbitmap which
> is also O(1).
But iterating an sbitmap has worse complexity than sparseset.
Ciao!
Steven
On Mon, Jul 30, 2012 at 4:43 PM, Peter Bergner wrote:
> On Fri, 27 Jul 2012 15:40:35 +0200 Richard Guenther
> wrote:
>> Also it looks less efficient than sbitmap in the case when
>> your main operation is adding to the set and querying the set randomly.
>
> How so? Adding/deleting a member to a
On Fri, 27 Jul 2012 15:40:35 +0200 Richard Guenther
wrote:
> Also it looks less efficient than sbitmap in the case when
> your main operation is adding to the set and querying the set randomly.
How so? Adding/deleting a member to a sparseset is an O(1) operation,
as is querying whether somethin
On Fri, 2012-07-27 at 15:40 +0200, Richard Guenther wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 11:57 AM, Steven Bosscher
> wrote:
> > On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 11:23 AM, Richard Guenther
> > wrote:
> >> Ok! Thanks for adding this exhaustive documentation.
> >
> > There's more to come! I want to add some ex
On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 11:57 AM, Steven Bosscher wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 11:23 AM, Richard Guenther
> wrote:
>> Ok! Thanks for adding this exhaustive documentation.
>
> There's more to come! I want to add some explanations to ebitmap,
> pointer-set, fibheap, and splay-tree as sets, and
On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 12:14 PM, Alexander Monakov wrote:
> Hello,
>
> + the set. If an element I is in the set, then sparse[I] is the
> + index of I in the dense vector, and dense[I] == I. The dense
> ^
> This should read "dense[sparse[I]
Hello,
+ the set. If an element I is in the set, then sparse[I] is the
+ index of I in the dense vector, and dense[I] == I. The dense
^
This should read "dense[sparse[I]] == I"
Thanks
Alexander
On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 11:23 AM, Richard Guenther
wrote:
> Ok! Thanks for adding this exhaustive documentation.
There's more to come! I want to add some explanations to ebitmap,
pointer-set, fibheap, and splay-tree as sets, and add a chapter in the
gccint manual too.
Now if only you'd document
On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 11:16 AM, Steven Bosscher wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Add some explanations because I see a lot of places where the choice
> of data structure is less than optimal.
>
> Also some functional changes: sbitmap with popcounts are only used in
> ebitmap, and they penalize the "normal" c
Hello,
Add some explanations because I see a lot of places where the choice
of data structure is less than optimal.
Also some functional changes: sbitmap with popcounts are only used in
ebitmap, and they penalize the "normal" case without popcount a lot.
Bootstrapped&tested on powepc64-unknown-l
12 matches
Mail list logo
