Archives/learnhaskell
2
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/bitemyapp/learnhaskell.git synced 2024-11-19 09:25:38 +00:00
Code Issues Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

testing formatting

Browse Source
This commit is contained in:
Chris Allen 2014-07-20 19:55:56 -05:00
parent 2c6d1cd247
commit e1bf3ef918
1 changed files with 16 additions and 21 deletions
Show Stats Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

37
dialogues.md
View File

@ -246,7 +246,6 @@ Maybe some simple and cool PDF tutorial which describes why haskell
could be as fast as others will be great to have. could be as fast as others will be great to have.
``` ```
```
Richard A. O'Keefe: Richard A. O'Keefe:
@ -312,32 +311,28 @@ After all, being able to do things that are unthinkable
in C is one of the reasons for learning Haskell. in C is one of the reasons for learning Haskell.
Why not tell us what problem P is? Why not tell us what problem P is?
```
```
Tony Morris: Tony Morris:
data SnocList a = SnocList ([a] -> [a]) > data SnocList a = SnocList ([a] -> [a])
>
Inserts to the front and end in O(1). > Inserts to the front and end in O(1).
```
### I consider the following conclusive ### I consider the following conclusive
```
Edward Kmett: Edward Kmett:
Note: all of the options for playing with lists and queues and fingertrees come with trade-offs. > Note: all of the options for playing with lists and queues and fingertrees come with trade-offs.
>
> Finger trees give you O(log n) appends and random access, O(1) cons/uncons/snoc/unsnoc etc. but _cost you_ infinite lists.
>
> Realtime queues give you the O(1) uncons/snoc. There are catenable output restricted deques that can preserve those and can upgrade you to O(1) append, but we've lost unsnoc and random access along the way.
>
> Skew binary random access lists give you O(log n) drop and random access and O(1) cons/uncons, but lose the infinite lists, etc.
>
> Tarjan and Mihaescu's deque may get you back worst-case bounds on more of the, but we still lose O(log n) random access and infinite lists.
>
> Difference lists give you an O(1) append, but alternating between inspection and construction can hit your asymptotics.
>
> Lists are used by default because they cleanly extend to the infinite cases, anything more clever necessarily loses some of that power.
Finger trees give you O(log n) appends and random access, O(1) cons/uncons/snoc/unsnoc etc. but _cost you_ infinite lists.
Realtime queues give you the O(1) uncons/snoc. There are catenable output restricted deques that can preserve those and can upgrade you to O(1) append, but we've lost unsnoc and random access along the way.
Skew binary random access lists give you O(log n) drop and random access and O(1) cons/uncons, but lose the infinite lists, etc.
Tarjan and Mihaescu's deque may get you back worst-case bounds on more of the, but we still lose O(log n) random access and infinite lists.
Difference lists give you an O(1) append, but alternating between inspection and construction can hit your asymptotics.
Lists are used by default because they cleanly extend to the infinite cases, anything more clever necessarily loses some of that power.
```