Re: can I do better that binary search
From: Richard Harter (cri_at_tiac.net)
Date: 05/29/04
- Next message: The Ghost In The Machine: "Re: limitation to the halting proof"
- Previous message: Marvin Minsky: "Re: neurons and artificial intelligence 2"
- In reply to: Abi: "Re: can I do better that binary search"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Sat, 29 May 2004 05:21:42 GMT
On 27 May 2004 18:40:55 +0530, Abi <abi_kREMSPAM@myrealbox.com> wrote:
>Could you be more specific. I didn't get much of it though what I'm
>looking for is something similar, I'm donot want to reduce total
>computational cost but only the number of comparisons and the elements
>are put into the array in sorted order one by one.
>abi
Your latter statement, "the elements are put into the array in sorted
order one by one" require amplification. Are we talking about a
static array (searches are done after all elements are entered) or a
dynamic array (the array can change between searches)? If it is a
dynamic array are elements added only at the end points or can they be
inserted into the interior of the array?
Richard Harter, cri@tiac.net
http://home.tiac.net/~cri, http://www.varinoma.com
A university is what a college becomes when the faculty
loses interest in students. - John Ciardi
- Next message: The Ghost In The Machine: "Re: limitation to the halting proof"
- Previous message: Marvin Minsky: "Re: neurons and artificial intelligence 2"
- In reply to: Abi: "Re: can I do better that binary search"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|