> i haven't found avl to be slow, so i was interested in
> this.
It was slow in relation to other methods available. That code wasn't
written to be fast. It came out of a long ago Sunday afternoon
discussion I had with someone about data structures, from which we
ended up cobbling together a few
> It's dog slow (actually, avl(2) is), but its effectively
> unbounded for the input dataset size.
i haven't found avl to be slow, so i was interested in
this. after stripping out the tmp file and the
unnecessary runes, prof tells me this for a
2000x1 array. (normal runtime ~20s)
minooka; p
On Sat, Nov 14, 2009 at 01:33:37PM +1100, Bruce Ellis wrote:
> Contact me off list and I'll explain it.
I'd rather like to know why too, if you can post the reason to the list.
Sam
It's the sort of thing I used to give as an exercise to students.
Wish I'd been in your class.
Explicit looping looks so strenuous.
I know: I kept thinking "map ... join": too much perl.
To make the tr|pr method more general, you can count columns first
with
But that's multi-pass:-).
Y
http://www.peereboom.us/epitome/
-- vs
> Wow.
> Excellent us of tools.
It's the sort of thing I used to give as an exercise to students.
> The smallest arbitrary-columns answer I could come up with was:
> awk '{if(m < NF)m=NF;for(i=1;i<=NF;i++)r[NR, i]=$i}END {for(i=1;i<=m;i+
> +){for(j=1;j<=NR;j++)printf "%s ", r[j,i];print ""}}' t
