What is the time and space complexity for your implementation? Equals the normal non-functional implementation?
On Tue, Feb 2, 2010 at 7:31 AM, e <evier...@gmail.com> wrote: > i was messing around a while back with this: > http://code.google.com/p/jc-pheap/ > > the algorithms work, but it's probably in a between-state. I wasn't sure > what the interface should look like exactly, and I was recently adding > support for duplicate keys (but I wasn't sure if I should have two > structures or one ... the latter being more of the multimap I'm describing). > > Oh, and I was starting to work on decreaseKey(), too ... but the runtime is > still, likely amortized for that one. I actually had an idea that I'm not > sure has ever been done before to make that operation even more baked. Fun > stuff. > > The project does not depend on clojure, but shows clojure code as an > example. If I recall, it all works. Hmmmm, maybe I'll get back into > working on it and variations, tho. > > On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 5:16 AM, ataggart <alex.tagg...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> >> On Dec 15, 1:49 am, ataggart <alex.tagg...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > On Dec 14, 5:48 am, Mark Tomko <mjt0...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > >> > > I wrote this implementation of a heap (or priority queue) in pure >> > > Clojure: >> > >> > >http://pastebin.com/m2ab1ad5a >> > >> > > It's probably not of any quality sufficient to be make it to the >> > > contrib package, but it seems to work. Any thoughts on how it might >> > > be improved? >> > >> > > Thanks, >> > > Mark >> > >> > Ideally such a collection would be usable with existing functions, >> > e.g. pop, peek. To accomplish that you really need to implement >> > against the expected java interfaces. >> > >> > I've been playing with the deftype/defprotocol stuff in the "new" >> > branch, so I figured I'd try to apply that to this problem. This is >> > what I came up with: >> > >> > http://gist.github.com/256815 >> >> To be clear, my implementation just uses a sorted list, not a true >> heap tree. >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >> Groups "Clojure" group. >> To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com >> Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with >> your first post. >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >> clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com<clojure%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com> >> For more options, visit this group at >> http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en >> > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups "Clojure" group. > To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com > Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with > your first post. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com<clojure%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com> > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en
