Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.python > #84086
| References | <CAG=hEY1L-39EmuWpdEh_n-BNfs=qG9nL=MrMT0ar72yGBrkoUA@mail.gmail.com> <m9k2cs$pk$1@ger.gmane.org> <54BEB745.2030309@seehart.com> |
|---|---|
| From | Devin Jeanpierre <jeanpierreda@gmail.com> |
| Date | 2015-01-20 12:19 -0800 |
| Subject | Re: Trees |
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.python |
| Message-ID | <mailman.17898.1421785195.18130.python-list@python.org> (permalink) |
There are similarly many kinds of hash tables. For a given use case (e.g. a sorted dict, or a list with efficient removal, etc.), there's a few data structures that make sense, and a library (even the standard library) doesn't have to expose which one was picked as long as the performance is good. -- Devin On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 12:15 PM, Ken Seehart <ken@seehart.com> wrote: > Exactly. There are over 23,000 different kinds of trees. There's no way you > could get all of them to fit in a library, especially a standard one. > Instead, we prefer to provide people with the tools they need to grow their > own trees. > > http://caseytrees.org/programs/planting/ctp/ > http://www.ncsu.edu/project/treesofstrength/treefact.htm > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tree > > On 1/19/2015 3:01 PM, Mark Lawrence wrote: >> >> 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. >> > > -- > https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Back to comp.lang.python | Previous | Next | Find similar | Unroll thread
Re: Trees Devin Jeanpierre <jeanpierreda@gmail.com> - 2015-01-20 12:19 -0800
csiph-web