On Wed, 27 Jan 2016 19:43:49 -0800 (PST), Scotty C <costo...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> Then you're not using the hash in a conventional manner ... else the >> filter entries would be unique > >using it conventionally? absolutely. it is a hash with separate chaining. You snipped the part I was responding to, which was: >>> In the worst case of every key being a bignum >>no, every key is contained within a bignum which can contain many >>many keys. You claim you want filtering to be as fast as possible. If that were so, you would not pack multiple keys (or features thereof) into a bignum but rather would store the keys individually. The 16-byte keys are 1/3 the size of even the _smallest_ bignum, and comparing two small byte strings is faster than anything you can do with the bignum. With the right data structure can put a lot more keys into the same space you're using now and use them faster. George -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Racket Users" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to racket-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
