Re: sets and vectors
From: Sheldon Simms (sheldonsimms_at_yahoo.com)
Date: 11/13/03
- Next message: Fergus Henderson: "Re: Programming Language Productivity: The Stupidity of Programmers"
- Previous message: Olathe: "Re: (!?) need fast algorithm for computing factorials"
- In reply to: L.J. Buitinck: "Re: sets and vectors"
- Next in thread: CBFalconer: "Re: sets and vectors"
- Reply: CBFalconer: "Re: sets and vectors"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 12:50:03 -0500
On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 15:48:50 +0100, L.J. Buitinck wrote:
> Corey Murtagh wrote:
>> Alex P wrote:
>>> Some languages provide structured types besides arrays,
>>> strings and records; for instance, sets and vectors.
>>> What are the advantages of these? What are the
>>> drawbacks? In what languages are they implemented?
>>
>> Pascal provides sets natively from memory. They're likely implemented
>> internally as a bit array, with one bit for each potential item in the
>> set. They get used a lot in Delphi, I know that much. Also implemented
>> in the C++ STL from memory.
>
> isn't that a bitset?
Pascal calls it a "Set", so I guess it's a set.
> a set is a mathematical object holding items, where such items may be
> contained only once in each set.
Which is exactly what Pascal provides, it's just that the only items
that can go into the set are identifiers.
- Next message: Fergus Henderson: "Re: Programming Language Productivity: The Stupidity of Programmers"
- Previous message: Olathe: "Re: (!?) need fast algorithm for computing factorials"
- In reply to: L.J. Buitinck: "Re: sets and vectors"
- Next in thread: CBFalconer: "Re: sets and vectors"
- Reply: CBFalconer: "Re: sets and vectors"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|
