On Tuesday, April 22, 2014 4:14:58 AM UTC-5, tcrayford wrote:
>
> Bonus: rename the library "immutable-long-map", then you can have a
> section in the readme titled "why the long map?"
>
> On Monday, 21 April 2014 13:12:05 UTC+1, Alex Miller wrote:
>>
>> This is great stuff. Why not longs? Are y
Bonus: rename the library "immutable-long-map", then you can have a section
in the readme titled "why the long map?"
On Monday, 21 April 2014 13:12:05 UTC+1, Alex Miller wrote:
>
> This is great stuff. Why not longs? Are you going for space savings?
--
You received this message because you are
Got it. Awesome.
Good job, Zach
On Mon, Apr 21, 2014 at 1:52 AM, Zach Tellman wrote:
> I could represent the map {0 :foo, 100 :bar} as an array, but it would
> have to be a million element array with a lot of empty space. This would be
> (maybe) faster w.r.t. lookups, but would be vastly s
Correct. I'll clarify that I mean 64 bit integers in the readme.
On Apr 21, 2014 5:26 AM, "Alex Miller" wrote:
> Never mind, look like you mean integer in the generic sense and you are
> using longs, right?
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> Groups "Cloj
I could represent the map {0 :foo, 100 :bar} as an array, but it would
have to be a million element array with a lot of empty space. This would be
(maybe) faster w.r.t. lookups, but would be vastly slower for enumerating
entries, merging other maps, and adding keys that are larger than the
"it's an immutable map that can only have positive integers as keys" -- Like
an array?
(My question is child of my complete ignorance, and I'm not questioning
your knowledge or motivation)
Plínio
On Mon, Apr 21, 2014 at 1:40 AM, Zach Tellman wrote:
> This one's pretty simple: it's an immutabl
