Re: Splay trees
- From: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik pobox com>
- To: gtk-devel-list redhat com
- cc: sandmann daimi au dk
- Subject: Re: Splay trees
- Date: Tue, 23 Mar 1999 20:21:56 -0500 (EST)
On Sun, 21 Mar 1999, Josh MacDonald wrote:
> Quoting Jeff Garzik (jgarzik@pobox.com):
> > On Sat, 20 Mar 1999, Josh MacDonald wrote:
> > > Would it be possible to merge the implementation of Splay trees with
> > > the other balanced tree implementation in glib, since they share so
> > > much? I think this should not be accepted until then.
> >
> > That would be nice, as I would like to add red-black trees to Glib.
>
> Its been a while since I studied these data structures, but I don't
> remember any real differences between red/black trees and AVL trees.
> Why do you want to add red/black trees?
The rbtree implementation I have benchmarks faster than Glib trees, so
I was lazy and hadn't looked at Glib trees in depth. :) (I would, of
course, before submitting a patch.) Taking a closer look at Glib's
trees, the data structures are indeed pretty much the same.
libavl looks pretty nice. It looks like a definite speed improvement
to Glib's trees if the libavl implementation is used. The threaded
vs. unthreaded is nice, and the libavl function to convert
unthreaded->threaded could be used in the _freeze/_thaw functions.
Jeff
[
Date Prev][
Date Next] [
Thread Prev][
Thread Next]
[
Thread Index]
[
Date Index]
[
Author Index]