On Tue, Sep 8, 2009 at 15:22, Conrad wrote:
>
> Ah! ArrayMap! I missed that structure in the documentation!
Well, I suspect there's a reason for that.
> That was exactly what I'm looking for.
Be aware that ArrayMap is something that Clojure uses internally only
to represent very small maps. Bas
Thanks again everyone for the helpful replies- The clojure community
is definitely one of the languages's strengths.
On Sep 7, 5:19 pm, Conrad wrote:
> Hi everyone! I have some data that consists of key/value pairs, but
> that need to maintain their order, in terms of when they were added to
> t
I agree that's a very sensible solution.
On Sep 8, 1:20 am, rivercheng wrote:
> Hi,
>
> How about just keep a list of keys as an extra list besides the hash-
> map?
> The look-up and iterating without order can be done efficiently
> without the help of the key list.
> Iterating with the original
Ah! ArrayMap! I missed that structure in the documentation!
That was exactly what I'm looking for.
On Sep 8, 1:09 am, Chouser wrote:
> On Sep 7, 2009, at 5:19 PM, Conrad wrote:
>
>
>
> > Hi everyone! I have some data that consists of key/value pairs, but
> > that need to maintain their order,
> Why not just use http://clojure.org/api#sorted-map ?
Because an association list keeps insertion order, whilst a sorted-map
keeps sorted order.
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Clojure" group.
To
Why not just use http://clojure.org/api#sorted-map ?
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Clojure" group.
To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com
Note that posts from new members are m
Hi,
How about just keep a list of keys as an extra list besides the hash-
map?
The look-up and iterating without order can be done efficiently
without the help of the key list.
Iterating with the original order is a little bit expensive but should
be acceptable if the hash function is fast.
Cert
On Sep 7, 2009, at 5:19 PM, Conrad wrote:
>
> Hi everyone! I have some data that consists of key/value pairs, but
> that need to maintain their order, in terms of when they were added to
> the list. In most lisps you'd do this with an association list, with a
> performance penalty of course if t
On Mon, Sep 7, 2009 at 5:19 PM, Conrad wrote:
> Alternatively, I suppose it would be possible to create a new type of
> map that performs better than an alist but can return items in the
> order they were added to the list, if desired
Or use an existing type: the java.util.LinkedHashMap. The do
