Talk:Greatest subsequential sum: Difference between revisions

Line 10:
: From the original Ruby example code, I'd expect it to be restricted to one-dimensional arrays. That's also what I implemented in C++ (actually, my function works not only on arrays, but on any sequence accessible through forward iterators, but sequences are one-dimensional by definition, too). An obvious restriction is, of course, that the array has a finite number of elements (some languages may be able to describe infinite arrays).
: Possibly renaming the article from "Maximum subarray" to "Maximum subsequence" would be a good idea (after all, the interesting part here is the algorithm, not the actual data structure used to store it; e.g. in Lisp, one might prefer to use lists rather than arrays). Or even better, rename it to something like "Subsequence with maximal element sum" (surely a better new title can be found along this line). --[[User:Ce|Ce]] 20:45, 4 August 2007 (EDT)
 
: I agree that "Maximum subsequence" would make a better title, and that specification in terms of subarrays suggests that summing across portions of higher-dimensional arrays should be included. [[User:TBH|TBH]] 04:24, 24 December 2007
Anonymous user