Re^5: mathematical proof


Perl: the Markov chain saw
	PerlMonks

Re^5: mathematical proof

by JavaFan (Canon)

on Feb 03, 2009 at 15:01 UTC ( #741011=note: print w/replies, xml )

Need Help??

in reply to Re^4: mathematical proof
in thread mathematical proof

As soon as someone talks about hash inserts being O(1) I assume that they are talking about the average case performance when your hash algorithm is working.

So do I (well, I try to avoid the term 'average' - in this case, I'd use 'expected'. 'amortized' is another term a layman may call 'average'). But I stop assuming that as soon as 'worst case' is mentioned. Or 'mathematical proof'.

Comment on Re^5: mathematical proof

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^6: mathematical proof by tilly (Archbishop) on Feb 03, 2009 at 16:40 UTC
Why would you stop making that assumption when "mathematical proof" is mentioned? We can mathematically prove what happens in the average case as easily as we can analyze the worst case, and frequently do so. Furthermore, as I already demonstrated, programmers usually care more about the average case than the worst case. And yes, average can mean several different things. I was slightly sloppy about that, but not so sloppy that I think it would cause any real confusion. However I stay away from "expected" with a lay audience because I worry that laypeople are likely to misunderstand "expected" as "median". Instead I'd lean towards "amortized".	[reply]
Re^6: mathematical proof by ikegami (Patriarch) on Feb 03, 2009 at 17:10 UTC
Sorry, but "average case" is well recognized and accepted terminology.	[reply]

In Section Seekers of Perl Wisdom

Domain Nodelet^?

www.com | www.net | www.org

Node Status^?

node history
Node Type: note [id://741011]
help

Chatterbox^?

How do I use this? | Other CB clients

Other Users^?

Others studying the Monastery: (3)

As of 2023-06-04 23:57 GMT

Sections^?

Information^?

Find Nodes^?

Leftovers^?

Voting Booth^?

Notices^?