Talk:AVL tree: Difference between revisions

← Older edit

Talk:AVL tree (view source)

Revision as of 16:56, 25 May 2020

688 bytes added , 3 years ago

m

Just explaining why I put it in in the first place.

Anonymous user

rosettacode>NNcNannara

Revision as of 22:04, 15 July 2016 (view source) rosettacode>Gerard Schildberger m (→‎Completing the task description: added my 2 cents.) ← Older edit		Latest revision as of 16:56, 25 May 2020 (view source) rosettacode>NNcNannara m (Just explaining why I put it in in the first place.)
(10 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown)
Line 4: :: The code for the elaborate version is production standard. Its a bit longer but it is perfectly correct. [[User:NNcNannara\|NNcNannara]] ([[User talk:NNcNannara\|talk]]) 18:14, 13 July 2016 (UTC) ::: I appreciate that, but you can't hold other entries on this wiki to the same standard, because many of them are deliberately simplified. [[User:Fwend\|Fwend]] ([[User talk:Fwend\|talk]]) 18:30, 13 July 2016 (UTC) :::: I did some testing and the abbreviated versions of C++ and Java have worse than O(NN<sup>2</sup>) instead of O(log N) on insertions and deletions. The C++ commentary made the point itself that it made a second 'pass' to balance the tree. It is this that is killing its performance. If[[User:NNcNannara\|NNcNannara]] ~~it is any consolation, the Wikipedia pseudo code will also be O~~(~~NN) or worse too. The page~~ [[~~AVL~~User ~~Tree/Performance~~talk:NNcNannara\|talk]]) ~~shows~~13:42, ~~the~~15 ~~performance~~July ~~test.~~2016 (UTC) ~~[[User:NNcNannara\|NNcNannara]] ([[User talk:NNcNannara\|talk]]) 13:42, 15 July 2016 (UTC)~~ ==New C++ AVL== Line 39 ⟶ 38: :: Of what I've seen, it can make them very   ''very''   grouchy.   -- [[User:Gerard Schildberger\|Gerard Schildberger]] ([[User talk:Gerard Schildberger\|talk]]) 22:04, 15 July 2016 (UTC) == beed? == This very strange looking language doesn't appear to exist. I propose removing the example for it. [[User:Thebigh\|Thebigh]] ([[User talk:Thebigh\|talk]]) 12:52, 25 May 2020 (UTC) Yes, go ahead and remove the strange looking language version. [[User:NNcNannara]]. *I see you already took care of it. Cheers! [[User:Thebigh\|Thebigh]] ([[User talk:Thebigh\|talk]]) 16:19, 25 May 2020 (UTC) Yes the strange looking language is futuristic database compiler. But if you don't want it that's ok. I haven't released the compiler - it is written in Java. Note how the switch statement operates on enumerations - it is very advanced. The compiler compiles code into an AVL database - there are no executables at all. Note that there are no expressions in this language - just methods. That's why it may look a bit strange.