2 ms·
Yes, of course, but all you've done is re-invent vectors. True, but only as a device to keep the playing field open for any new benefits that might spring from
by gruseom 15y ago
Yes, of course, but all you've done is re-invent vectors.
True, but only as a device to keep the playing field open for any new benefits that might spring from universal hashmaps. What are they? I don't know, that's the question. Maybe there aren't any, but that itself would be interesting as a negative result (the L in Lisp is there for a reason).
What I'd really like to know is what would complete this sequence: list:Lisp, array:APL, stack:Forth, hashmap:?. That would be really interesting, no? And no one seems to be working on it, which is surprising given the ubiquity of hashmaps in modern languages (especially JS, but also Python, Lua, etc).
- jes5199 15y agowhen I had a similar thought about hashmaps, I noticed that a hashmap is basically a function that takes one argument and returns a constant. And then I fell into a Turing tar pit about Church encoding. ... I'd love to try again, though.