Re: Memory overhead for trees?
by =?iso-8859-1?q?Fran=E7ois?= Pinard other posts by this author
Aug 16 2002 12:23PM messages near this date
Re: Memory overhead for trees?
|
Re: Memory overhead for trees?
[Paul Rubin]
> pinard@[...].ca (François Pinard) writes:
> > I'm toying with the idea of converting an existing LISP system into
> > Python. The system uses a lot of real trees, I mean, more deep than
> > wide on average. Trees are traversed and explored a great deal, but
> > modified relatively less often. I'm seeking a representation which,
> > while being reasonably efficient -- yet no miracles are expected here! --
> > is not too voracious on memory.
> If it's a binary tree that's reasonably balanced,
Oh, for this application, trees are not especially binary, many nodes are
likely to have many children. Moreover, they are most likely not balanced
at all. But trees might often be deep, they are not of the shallow type.
--
François Pinard http://www.iro.umontreal.ca/~pinard
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Thread:
Paul Rubin
=?iso-8859-1?q?Fran=E7ois?= Pinard
Skip Montanaro
|