3 ms·
> That is not O(1) for insert and read Of course it is. > Sort is O(log N) Sort is irrelevant, as I already told you ordered != sorted. > I am correct No m
by masklinn 2y ago
> That is not O(1) for insert and read
Of course it is.
> Sort is O(log N)
Sort is irrelevant, as I already told you ordered != sorted.
> I am correct
No my dude, you’ve got no idea what you’re talking about and you apparently can’t read.
> If you need sorted keys
Then you’re in the wrong place because that’s not what ordered maps do.
> The person who wants a HASH table with sorted keys
Is not germane to the discussion.
> Maths
Maths have nothing to do with your apparent inability to understand basic English or intake new information.
- worik 2y agoHow are you maintaining a sorted list (required) O(1)?
- masklinn 2y agoAgain, for the fourth time, you are not. An ordered collection is not a sorted collection.
- worik 2y agoSO you want a HASH table and a stack? Wih the Hash table keep a stack of keys. How do you delete them? Oh. Same problem. You have O(1) insert and O(log N) deletion Or the stack grows for ever. When you ask for ordered keys, at zero cost, in a Hash it is like asking the Tooth Fairy. You can ask for anything you want, but you cannot have anything you want!
- masklinn 2y agoMan you’re a lost cause. It takes you two days to understand a simple idea and when you finally do you’re incapable of even acknowledging it, and instead have to move the goalposts to an irrelevant aside only to be wrong again. Is this a kink? Do you get off on appearing incompetent? If so good job.
- worik 2y agoIt is a kink of mine to argue with people who wish for the impossible The goal post was a HASH table with ordered keys. ' Such a thing cannot exist and retain the desirable properties of a HASH tab=le Do you think that statement is untrue? Do you understand order analysis?