Talk:Doubly-linked list/Definition
Some languages provide pre-defined libraries for doubly-linked lists. Do you want to allow use of those libraries? --Waldorf 21:44, 26 December 2008 (UTC)
- I would say showing implementation would be more interesting than simply using "vectors", "lists" or whatever else the language/built in libs have. Nonetheless, as it happened in another task, this site is about showing common (?) way to do things in a language, not implementing libraries... So if a (standard and widespread) libs/way exist in a language, I believe it should be used. Am I right? ... In C, there's no such a standard library (or I don't know it...), so I implemented the code. --ShinTakezou 18:17, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
About C
I wrote this code for another task, but it was not suitable for it. Then I discovered it is suitable for this one; but I did not test it deeply. --ShinTakezou 18:17, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
Relation with other tasks?
There two colliding tasks:
This seems like a piece of silly duplication... —Dkf 13:06, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
- Yes. Feel free to merge. Same with the Singly-linked list tasks. --IanOsgood 14:26, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
Task definition is unclear?
What does it mean "The structure should not allow circular loops"? To me, it's the design of data structure, which should support that; however, I seem to see in the some examples that it's the attached code which takes care about that.
And the code itself, by the way, isn't required by this task, though it would clearly be useful to have data structures together with associated code for working with them. Should we update the task definition (and possibly make existing examples invalid)?Avmich 01:36, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
I'm bumping this. Are built-in libraries allowed? I agree that "circular loops" are just part of the design and should be allowed. This needs to be refined. --Mwn3d 20:46, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
- This is one of the original tasks I created when I first launched Rosetta Code. I didn't even know of C++'s std::list at the time. For all I care, it (and its relations) can be deprecated and replaced with somet. In fact, I'd recommend that. One good alternate direction would be to seek to catalog and demonstrate all common container structures, in both library and transparent-implementation form. (Much like we have under Category:Control Structures, but perhaps a bit more ambitious with the transparent-implementation goal.) --Michael Mol 05:57, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
Python attitude problem
The Python section is plain wrong. Linked list is for algorithms, not just normal data storage, saying "I'm high level language la la la" is just silly.