[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Date Index]
[Thread Index]
- Subject: Re: pairs(t, skey) and ipairs(t, skey)
- From: Luiz Henrique de Figueiredo <lhf@...>
- Date: Sun, 6 Oct 2013 22:44:44 -0300
> I think I prefer my approach, which had a very small incremental overhead at inserts (so was n * O(1)), but O(1) behavior for #.
But this implies a cost for all uses and users. Not everyone needs or uses #.
We prefer that cost be paid by those who need it.
- References:
- Re: pairs(t, skey) and ipairs(t, skey), Philipp Janda
- Re: pairs(t, skey) and ipairs(t, skey), Tim Hill
- Re: pairs(t, skey) and ipairs(t, skey), Coda Highland
- Re: pairs(t, skey) and ipairs(t, skey), Tim Hill
- Re: pairs(t, skey) and ipairs(t, skey), Dirk Laurie
- Re: pairs(t, skey) and ipairs(t, skey), Tim Hill
- Re: pairs(t, skey) and ipairs(t, skey), Philipp Janda
- Re: pairs(t, skey) and ipairs(t, skey), Tim Hill
- Re: pairs(t, skey) and ipairs(t, skey), Philipp Janda
- Re: pairs(t, skey) and ipairs(t, skey), Tim Hill