Difference between revisions of "Talk:DIP55"
FBergemann (talk | contribs) |
FBergemann (talk | contribs) |
||
| (2 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| + | 2016-07-29 - FBergemann: | ||
| + | ------------------------ | ||
| + | I am sorry, i had no time to continue working for ASF-RBT :-( <br> | ||
| + | There are still some errors for the delete operation that i have to fix. <br> | ||
| + | Hope i will find some time to finalize this, soon. <br> | ||
| + | But maybe you at least can get my point here. <br> | ||
| + | Any comment would be welcome. <br> | ||
| + | |||
| + | <span style="color:blue">I wonder, that DIP55 is not rejected, but also no comment at all(?!)</span> <br> | ||
| + | |||
| + | |||
2016-06-15 - FBergemann: | 2016-06-15 - FBergemann: | ||
------------------------ | ------------------------ | ||
| Line 8: | Line 19: | ||
'''Notes:''' <br> | '''Notes:''' <br> | ||
+) ASF-RBT still has to be tested, documented, and cleaned-up (re-align "insert" with experiences from "delete"), maybe still some errors to be fixed. <br> | +) ASF-RBT still has to be tested, documented, and cleaned-up (re-align "insert" with experiences from "delete"), maybe still some errors to be fixed. <br> | ||
| − | +) ASF-RBT was modelled on some existing legacy implementation. So it's far away from a | + | +) ASF-RBT was modelled on some existing legacy implementation. So it's yet far away from a "native" implementation using the new programming model. <br> |
+) ASF-RBT is just an '''example''' for this new toolbox offered by functions having a *caller ptr for the calling function. <br> | +) ASF-RBT is just an '''example''' for this new toolbox offered by functions having a *caller ptr for the calling function. <br> | ||
Latest revision as of 10:09, 29 July 2016
2016-07-29 - FBergemann:
I am sorry, i had no time to continue working for ASF-RBT :-(
There are still some errors for the delete operation that i have to fix.
Hope i will find some time to finalize this, soon.
But maybe you at least can get my point here.
Any comment would be welcome.
I wonder, that DIP55 is not rejected, but also no comment at all(?!)
2016-06-15 - FBergemann:
An initial version of
- ASF RBT Red/Black-Tree algorithm using this programming model w/o need for a parent ptr in the node structure.
- including delete operation - is available now.
I feel excited about the new way of programming :-)
And i am pretty sure, so far i only touched the top of an iceberg.
Notes:
+) ASF-RBT still has to be tested, documented, and cleaned-up (re-align "insert" with experiences from "delete"), maybe still some errors to be fixed.
+) ASF-RBT was modelled on some existing legacy implementation. So it's yet far away from a "native" implementation using the new programming model.
+) ASF-RBT is just an example for this new toolbox offered by functions having a *caller ptr for the calling function.
