Date: Sun, 7 Mar 2004 11:04:27 -0800 From: Chris Pressey <cpressey@catseye.mine.nu> To: Narvi <narvi@haldjas.folklore.ee> Cc: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD Most wanted Message-ID: <20040307110427.67a4394e.cpressey@catseye.mine.nu> In-Reply-To: <20040307204413.W68396@haldjas.folklore.ee> References: <Pine.LNX.4.43.0403011839470.3269-100000@pilchuck.reedmedia.net> <EABDE846-6EF2-11D8-AE09-000A95DA58FE@jimz.net> <20040306005744.T38020@haldjas.folklore.ee> <20040305153505.74061868.cpressey@catseye.mine.nu> <20040306013914.D38020@haldjas.folklore.ee> <404A465A.1040009@stephanmantler.com> <6.0.1.1.1.20040306214526.08c5ed70@imap.sfu.ca> <20040306141742.4f41ba27.cpressey@catseye.mine.nu> <6.0.1.1.1.20040306221435.03a97e20@imap.sfu.ca> <20040306155513.6a75e264.cpressey@catseye.mine.nu> <20040307204413.W68396@haldjas.folklore.ee>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, 7 Mar 2004 20:46:32 +0200 (EET) Narvi <narvi@haldjas.folklore.ee> wrote: > > On Sat, 6 Mar 2004, Chris Pressey wrote: > > > > > And, yeah. A hash table is really nothing by itself. It's just a way > > of taking a long list (or other structure) and splitting it up into N > > smaller structures. If your lists are never that long in the first > > place, there's no point. > > > > URKH! No it doesn't. Or rather, it should - I don't know what you are referring to here. > there are almost no good > reasons to use a naive chaining hash table. I did say list *(or other structure)*. -Chris
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040307110427.67a4394e.cpressey>