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,f2690a5e963b61b6
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news1.google.com!news3.google.com!news2.google.com!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newsfeed00.sul.t-online.de!newsfeed01.sul.t-online.de!t-online.de!newsfeed.arcor.de!news.arcor.de!not-for-mail
Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2005 21:47:57 +0200
From: Georg Bauhaus <bauhaus@futureapps.de>
Organization: future apps GmbH
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US;
 rv:1.7.8) Gecko/20050513 Debian/1.7.8-1
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: GCC 4.0 Ada.Containers Cursor danger.
References: <1120583470.429264.325450@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
   <osoo6gccqpnm.2o5eehhafwb1.dlg@40tude.net>
   <42cb8d21$0$22761$9b4e6d93@newsread2.arcor-online.net>
   <ldco4pwrxop4$.1py0a7isiagea.dlg@40tude.net>
   <z--dnRI60_7j_lHfRVn-qw@megapath.net>
   <tyi72ga8ch55$.3tea03tbwrtx.dlg@40tude.net>
   <42cd064c$0$10817$9b4e6d93@newsread4.arcor-online.net>
   <k62rlp2n1ls3.1cnwufmnuit7v.dlg@40tude.net>
   <42cda8c4$0$22780$9b4e6d93@newsread2.arcor-online.net>
   <1u3hh2597i4ne$.1ryetugksbmus.dlg@40tude.net>
   <uslyp8mmb.fsf@earthlink.net>
   <1121093807.949660.274060@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
   <1121124248.600055.292320@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>
   <1121137531.752285.44280@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
   <946e7$42d3c64d$4995421$28449@ALLTEL.NET>
   <1121179909.262566.192270@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com>
   <5a73f$42d40166$4995149$5993@ALLTEL.NET>
   <1121194262.036046.38230@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
 <1121195712.513120.70330@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
In-Reply-To: <1121195712.513120.70330@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <42d41e64$0$25701$9b4e6d93@newsread2.arcor-online.net>
NNTP-Posting-Date: 12 Jul 2005 21:47:48 MEST
NNTP-Posting-Host: 067e2d82.newsread2.arcor-online.net
X-Trace: 
 DXC=YC2dKMmQC\6RTD7Kih:TB8Q5U85hF6f;4jW\KbG]kaM86=9@_^<GbD9boRmjLY];2>UUng9_FXZ=3>:=P9Ihe`B8@Z?dZ]MOid5
X-Complaints-To: abuse@arcor.de
Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:12022
Date: 2005-07-12T21:47:48+02:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Matthew Heaney wrote:
> 
> MMM wrote:
> 
>>The problem is that Matthew insists that
>>there is no need for a plain
>>vanilla unordered set and/or plain vanilla unordered hash...
> 
> 
> Because unordered sets and maps would have O(n) time complexity, which
> makes them useless for real programs.  You might as well just use a
> list.

My lists can find an element in O(log N). Depends on how
I implement a list. E.g. use a skip list for plain list
purposes. So is it a set then? No. But it happens to be
sorted (ordered by values, and maybe ordered by links).

I remember RBKD mentioning the As-If-Rule. With this rule in
mind, should user level container properties other than running time
expectations be defined in terms of O(f(n))?


-- Georg