Re: Red-black trees?

Richard Harter wrote:
On Fri, 21 Nov 2008 03:47:36 +0000, Jon Harrop
<jon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Richard Harter wrote:
On Thu, 20 Nov 2008 00:55:19 +0000, Jon Harrop
<jon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Right, and scheme two does not provide O(1) operations, which was the
original requirement.

No, the original requirement that you posed was that it not be

Nonsense. CBF stated the requirement: "If the hash-table is properly
designed, operations are O(1), and size doesn't matter".

I'm not interested in CBF's statements. Why on Earth should I
be; the quality of his dicta are well known. Our discussion
begins with your claims about hash tables necessarily having O(n)

Then you're taking my statement about CBF's hash table implementation out of

Dr Jon D Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd.