No
I wanted to say that you create a linearisation of the search and apply
tourtouse hare on that. One can make that linearisation fast for list
traversals but expensive for deep trees. To note here is that if we had one
bit to spare for every cons representation we could do use that bit to mark
c
I actually implemented an algorithm to handle infinite trees that we could
use if we like.
Enjoy!
On Mon, Sep 3, 2012 at 12:07 AM, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Stefan Israelsson Tampe skribis:
>
> > The cycle detection for a tree would probably look something like,
>
> Tortoise-and-hare
Hi,
Stefan Israelsson Tampe skribis:
> (define (c-equal-1 x y)
> (match x
> (((and xx (_ . _)) . _)
[...]
> ((xx . _)
[...]
> (_ (equal? x y
Doesn’t this mean that ‘cycle-equal?’ falls back to ‘equal?’ for
non-pairs?
Ludo’.
Yes, so it is no real replacement. For that we need yo hamdle vectors ,
structs etc. Eg cycles is only allowed in the pair part.
If we wan't this for the general case, please ask!
/stefan
Den 3 sep 2012 23:12 skrev "Ludovic Courtès" :
> Hi,
>
> Stefan Israelsson Tampe skribis:
>
> > (define (
