> The first-mentioned AVL library does provide at least one feature > that GNU libavl does not: it can efficiently locate an item in > the tree based on the number of elements it is from the beginning > of the list. There are other differences too. In my little AVL libray I tried to decouple the balancing code from the ordering stuff, resulting in functions like insert_after and insert_before. In existing code I have used my avl code for ordered collections, sets, a heap, even an array-like thing (one that can do deletes, efficiently). Guus suggested we try and merge the libraries. I don't know enough about GNU libavl 2.0 to see if that is feasible. Perhaps it would be interesting to seperate the balancing part from the ordering and augmentation more clearly and offer ADT's as a frontend. Just a thought. Kind regards, -- Wessel Dankers <wsl@fruit.eu.org> secretary plugged hairdryer into UPS
Attachment:
pgp1F632Xp5Hi.pgp
Description: PGP signature