> What the article calls "constant time in practice" is necessary, but not sufficient. So non-CTIP data structures cannot be fast! There it is again! This lin

> What the article calls "constant time in practice" is necessary, but not sufficient. So non-CTIP data structures cannot be fast! There it is again! This line in particular jumped out at me: One way to make these trees faster is to increase the “branching factor”. And we are lead to conclude that the 32-ary tree is faster than the binary tree. But there's necessarily a tradeoff here: a larger branching factor results in fewer node traversals, but more copying and wasted space on insertions and deletions. So it's not at all obvious that a higher branch factor is faster. After all, in the limit as the branch factor approaches infinity, you recover naive arrays. Basically I'm begging for benchmarks! It would be very interesting to see the performance effects of adjusting the branch factor.