From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Thread: 103376,703c4f68db81387d X-Google-Thread: 109fba,703c4f68db81387d X-Google-Thread: 115aec,703c4f68db81387d X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,gid109fba,gid115aec,public X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit Path: g2news1.google.com!news1.google.com!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail From: Vinzent 'Gadget' Hoefler Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.c++,comp.realtime Subject: Re: Teaching new tricks to an old dog (C++ -->Ada) Followup-To: comp.lang.ada Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 10:28:15 +0000 Message-ID: <1948665.ii7ipjq4RT@jellix.jlfencey.com> References: <4229bad9$0$1019$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au> <1110032222.447846.167060@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <871xau9nlh.fsf@insalien.org> <3SjWd.103128$Vf.3969241@news000.worldonline.dk> <87r7iu85lf.fsf@insalien.org> <1110052142.832650@athnrd02> <1110284070.410136.205090@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <395uqaF5rhu2mU1@individual.net> <1110329098.642196@athnrd02> <1110361741.551255@athnrd02> <422edaec$0$26554$9b4e6d93@newsread4.arcor-online.net> <1111464133.508323@athnrd02> <423fe9df$0$11476$9b4e6d93@newsread2.arcor-online.net> <1111524623.705533@athnrd02> <4240937b$0$9215$9b4e6d93@newsread4.arcor-online.net> <1111568536.640808@athnrd02> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit X-Trace: individual.net GZkmI9NsWPZjaBI44HFJVw/QOMOb5o6vaffVk/U64GWU8qM4Ba X-Phone: +41 62 961 13 52 X-Mood: Beautiful day to take over the world. Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:9780 comp.lang.c++:46782 comp.realtime:1602 Date: 2005-03-23T10:28:15+00:00 List-Id: Ioannis Vranos wrote: > Georg Bauhaus wrote: > >>> I forgot to say here that the cost of map's operator[] is O(log(n)) >>> which is fairly cheap for large amount of data. >> >> compare O(log(n)) to O(1) where n is 1, 1000, 1_000_000. >> Make this access a part of an inner loop. > > If you do the maths, you will see that log(10^6) isn't that large. Yeah, right. Binary searches are not much slower. Only about 10 or 20 times. Seem, you just rendered hashing algorithms obsolete. Vinzent. -- worst case: The wrong assumption there actually is one.