On Mon, 03 Sep 2001 19:30:33 -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote: >The less real question, "Should pads be hashes or arrays", can be answered >by "whichever is ultimately cheaper". My bet is we'll probably keep the >array structure with embedded names, and do a linear search for those rare >times you're actually looking by name. Perhaps a lookup hash for the names, containing the offsets? -- Bart.
- Re: Should MY:: be a real symbol table? Dan Sugalski
- Re: Should MY:: be a real symbol table? Ken Fox
- Re: Should MY:: be a real symbol table? Dan Sugalski
- RE: Should MY:: be a real symbol table? Brent Dax
- RE: Should MY:: be a real symbol table? Sam Tregar
- RE: Should MY:: be a real symbol table? Dan Sugalski
- RE: Should MY:: be a real symbol table? Dave Mitchell
- RE: Should MY:: be a real symbol table? Dan Sugalski
- RE: Should MY:: be a real symbol table? Garrett Goebel
- Re: Should MY:: be a real symbol table? Bart Lateur
- Re: Should MY:: be a real symbol table? Bart Lateur
- Re: Should MY:: be a real symbol table? Ken Fox
- Re: Should MY:: be a real symbol table? Dan Sugalski
- Re: Should MY:: be a real symbol table? Dan Sugalski