in reply to Re^4: "Just use a hash": An overworked mantra?
in thread "Just use a hash": An overworked mantra?
kewl.
thanks for the pointer in a table, I overlooked it - indeed - it takes a special care to find this place, since the only mention w/o any argumentation - not in line of overall text, easy to e\overlook, and - still - does not convince me - where is argumentation?
a bit pity that O(1) for hashes actually do not reflects on what is actually going on inside perl.
thanks for the pointer in a table, I overlooked it - indeed - it takes a special care to find this place, since the only mention w/o any argumentation - not in line of overall text, easy to e\overlook, and - still - does not convince me - where is argumentation?
a bit pity that O(1) for hashes actually do not reflects on what is actually going on inside perl.
for a prove of my point - well, look into perl implementation of hashes - just read the comments - and you will see it.
Convincing?
Well, URLs provided to me are even less convincing..... :o
|
|---|
| Replies are listed 'Best First'. | |
|---|---|
|
Re^6: "Just use a hash": An overworked mantra?
by Anonymous Monk on Dec 24, 2011 at 21:25 UTC |
In Section
Meditations