Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.python > #84059

Re: Trees

From Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net>
Newsgroups comp.lang.python
Subject Re: Trees
Date 2015-01-20 07:19 +0200
Organization A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID <87k30ihvvx.fsf@elektro.pacujo.net> (permalink)
References <CAG=hEY1L-39EmuWpdEh_n-BNfs=qG9nL=MrMT0ar72yGBrkoUA@mail.gmail.com> <mailman.17865.1421708518.18130.python-list@python.org>

Show all headers | View raw

Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk>:

> On 19/01/2015 22:06, Zachary Gilmartin wrote:
>> Why aren't there trees in the python standard library?
>
> Probably because you'd never get agreement as to which specific tree
> and which specific implementation was the most suitable for inclusion.

Most programming languages provide one standard sorted mapping
implementation.

GvR is highly suspicious of the utility of trees and wouldn't like to
take the burden of maintaining them in the stdlib.

So in my Python software (both at work and at home) needs, I use a
Python AVL tree implementation of my own. My use case is timers. (GvR
uses heapq for the purpose.)


Marko

Back to comp.lang.python | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Re: Trees Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2015-01-19 23:01 +0000
  Re: Trees Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2015-01-20 07:19 +0200
    Re: Trees Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2015-01-20 14:21 +0000
    Re: Trees Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-01-20 09:42 -0800
      Re: Trees Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2015-01-20 22:25 +0200

csiph-web