My Dictionary and Set implementations (neither of which inherits from the other)
grow but do not shrink. It's easy enough to do, I just have not
bothered because
I have a significant redesign that improves space and time that needs finishing.
I've used the marking-deleted-entries technique in the
Hi RIchard,
On 9 February 2020 at 17.54.30, Richard O'Keefe (rao...@gmail.com) wrote:
My library uses separate chaining
(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hash_table#Separate_chaining)
which makes deletion simple and fast and allows 'null' keys.
Does your implementation use a fixed number of buckets
It's a problem with the traditional Smalltalk-80 implementation of Dictionaries.
Using my compiler and library,
1311 usec to build
498 usec to delete (1..1)
1318 usec to build
472 usec to delete (1..1)
(The time difference between building and deleting is mostly #printString.)
There is no
!
I need to test it with real datas, to be continued.
Thanks for all.
Pierre
*De :* Pharo-users [mailto:pharo-users-boun...@lists.pharo.org] *De la part
de* PBKResearch
*Envoyé :* lundi 3 février 2020 12:25
*À :* 'Any question about pharo is welcome'
*Objet :* Re: [Pharo-users]
un...@lists.pharo.org] De la part de
PBKResearch
Envoyé : lundi 3 février 2020 12:25
À : 'Any question about pharo is welcome'
Objet : Re: [Pharo-users] Dictionary removeKey: very low
Pierre
It’s all to do with rehashing. A dictionary is stored as an Array of
Association. After a key a
Pierre
It’s all to do with rehashing. A dictionary is stored as an Array of
Association. After a key and its corresponding association is removed, the
remaining entries are rehashed from the removal point to the end of the array.
By doing the removals in natural order, you rehash the whole o
