Remaining changes
Wolfgang Corcoran-Mathe
(04 Sep 2020 17:12 UTC)
|
||
Re: Remaining changes
John Cowan
(05 Sep 2020 03:41 UTC)
|
||
(missing)
|
||
(missing)
|
||
(missing)
|
||
Fwd: Remaining changes
Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen
(06 Sep 2020 07:43 UTC)
|
||
Re: Remaining changes
Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen
(06 Sep 2020 09:33 UTC)
|
||
Re: Remaining changes
Wolfgang Corcoran-Mathe
(06 Sep 2020 17:24 UTC)
|
||
Re: Remaining changes Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen (06 Sep 2020 17:30 UTC)
|
||
Re: Remaining changes
Wolfgang Corcoran-Mathe
(06 Sep 2020 17:40 UTC)
|
||
Re: Remaining changes
John Cowan
(06 Sep 2020 20:04 UTC)
|
||
Re: Remaining changes
Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen
(06 Sep 2020 20:40 UTC)
|
||
Re: Remaining changes
John Cowan
(07 Sep 2020 00:03 UTC)
|
||
Re: Remaining changes
Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen
(07 Sep 2020 06:31 UTC)
|
||
Re: Remaining changes
Wolfgang Corcoran-Mathe
(07 Sep 2020 15:46 UTC)
|
||
Re: Remaining changes
Wolfgang Corcoran-Mathe
(07 Sep 2020 20:56 UTC)
|
||
Re: Remaining changes
John Cowan
(07 Sep 2020 21:16 UTC)
|
||
Re: Remaining changes
Wolfgang Corcoran-Mathe
(07 Sep 2020 21:57 UTC)
|
||
Re: Remaining changes
Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen
(08 Sep 2020 14:25 UTC)
|
||
Re: Remaining changes
John Cowan
(08 Sep 2020 15:26 UTC)
|
||
Fwd: Remaining changes
John Cowan
(05 Sep 2020 17:48 UTC)
|
||
Fwd: Remaining changes
Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen
(05 Sep 2020 12:59 UTC)
|
||
Re: Remaining changes
Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen
(05 Sep 2020 13:07 UTC)
|
Am So., 6. Sept. 2020 um 19:24 Uhr schrieb Wolfgang Corcoran-Mathe <xxxxxx@sigwinch.xyz>: > The only comment I have is that the variadic procedures range-fold, > etc. are described as running in time "O(n) where n is the sum of the > total accessing times of the ranges", which is a slight > oversimplification. As a rule, these procedures terminate when the > shortest range runs out, so the actual requirement is rather more > complicated. But the requirement given is indeed the upper bound on > running time, so I wouldn't change anything. Indeed, it is a simplification in the case of ranges of different lengths. Unfortunately, one cannot make the bound sharper without even more abstractions as a single"average accessing time" wouldn't be enough anymore but would have to be replaced by one parameterized by the index of the element that is accessed. > I agree with the substantial changes, including the revised running > time requirement for range-append. I think this patch should be > merged. I have no objections when you have proof-read what I wrote. Initially, I decided to use the patch format because it was easier for me than listing all proposed changes in a long list. :) Marc