On Thu, Jul 16, 2009 at 1:52 AM, John Harrop wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 12:58 PM, Mark Engelberg
> wrote:
>>
>> It looks like stack-rot is going to be the bottleneck in your app
>> since it requires traversing the whole vector to build the new one,
>> but I think the list-based implementati
On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 12:58 PM, Mark Engelberg
wrote:
>
> It looks like stack-rot is going to be the bottleneck in your app
> since it requires traversing the whole vector to build the new one,
> but I think the list-based implementation would be a bit worse, so I
> think your choice to use vecto
On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 6:00 PM, Mark Engelberg wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 9:58 AM, Mark Engelberg
> wrote:
>> The problem with subvec is that it doesn't really create a "new"
>> vector, it just adds a level of indirection off of the original
>> vector. So for example, if you look up, sa
On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 9:58 AM, Mark Engelberg wrote:
> The problem with subvec is that it doesn't really create a "new"
> vector, it just adds a level of indirection off of the original
> vector. So for example, if you look up, say, index 2 in the subvec,
> it knows to go look up index 5 in the
On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 3:51 AM, Jan Rychter wrote:
> I am not sure what you mean about subvecs, though -- I currently use
> them for dropn and rot operations, and I don't know how to avoid using
> them:
The problem with subvec is that it doesn't really create a "new"
vector, it just adds a level
Thanks to everyone who replied in this thread. I am impressed by the
signal-to-noise ration on this list and by the quality of replies. I
will try to reply to everyone in a single post, trying to summarize.
> On Jul 13, 11:15 am, Jan Rychter wrote:
>> I've been trying to implement stacks using v
Hi
Instead of:
(conj (drop-last 1 [1 2 3]) 4)
You could use into []:
(conj (into [] (drop-last 1 [1 2 3])) 4)
[1 2 4]
Stephane _/)
On Jul 13, 11:15 am, Jan Rychter wrote:
> I've been trying to implement stacks using vectors in Clojure. In case
> you wonder why, it's because I need stacks w
On Jul 13, 11:15 am, Jan Rychter wrote:
> I've been trying to implement stacks using vectors in Clojure. In case
> you wonder why, it's because I need stacks with a fast item count
> operation.
If that's the only reason, you don't have to use vectors. The
following page says that 'count' for
On Mon, Jul 13, 2009 at 11:15 AM, Jan Rychter wrote:
>
> However, after reading "Programming Clojure" (page 114) I expected to be
> able to use sequence functions, such as drop-last, without my vectors
> changing representation. It seems this is not the case, as after calling
> drop-last (or indee
On Mon, Jul 13, 2009 at 8:15 AM, Jan Rychter wrote:
> And while we're on the subject -- any hints for implementing a stack
> with a fast item count? (apart from a list with a separate counter)
Using conj and pop on vectors for stack operations should work just
fine. Don't use subvec though; nest
the sequence functions operate on sequences. if you pass in something
that is not a sequence, like a vector, they call seq on it internally.
so what you get back from filter or map is a sequence. conj has
consistent behavior across types, you just get a different type out of
map/filter/etc then wh
11 matches
Mail list logo
