Warp wrote:
> Mueen Nawaz <m.n### [at] ieeeorg> wrote:
>> Warp wrote:
>>>   The difference is that it will use a hash table rather than a binary tree.
> 
>>         I mistakenly thought the current map already did that...
> 
>   It's impossible to use a hash table and get the elements in increasing
> order with a linear traversal. (Ok, it *is* possible, but then you get an
> extremely inefficient hash table.)
> 
>>         So the onus of coming up with a function will be on the user?
> 
>   It's impossible to provide good (or even working) hash functions for
> all possible user-defined types.
> 
>> Will it provide some defaults?
> 
>   I don't know.

	Well, I was comparing this all with python dicts. It uses a hashing 
function, and does not guarantee any particular order (no attempts of 
returning in any sorted manner). The catch is that the key must be 
either an number or a string.

	I had assumed maps also used hashing function.

	So I was just wondering if hashmaps may provide some function for 
"common" use cases...

-- 
Lisa: Oedipus killed his father and married his mother.
Homer: Who payed for THAT wedding?


                     /\  /\               /\  /
                    /  \/  \ u e e n     /  \/  a w a z
                        >>>>>>mue### [at] nawazorg<<<<<<
                                    anl

Post a reply to this message