ckuehne

22 ms·

181.
by ckuehne 17y ago
As a starting point have a look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Predicate_transformer_semantics .
182.
by ckuehne 17y ago
Ahem, straw men arguments?
183.
by ckuehne 17y ago
Oh my, another handwaving article about Big O Notation. Why does everyone and their mother feel the need to explain this thing in "plain English". "Big O notation seeks to describe the relative complexity of an algorithm [...]" Relative to
184.
by ckuehne 17y ago
The article is really badly flawed. It does not even touch the reason why we use Big-O notation in the first place. That is to avoid clutter like constant factors or the basis of logratihms. If it would than such mistakes as in the example
185.
Are You an Aspie? Take the Test!(rdos.net)
2 points by ckuehne 17y ago|1 comments
186.
by ckuehne 17y ago
>He's wrong for a simple reason: Breasts are expensive. They are expensive to maintain, and no other animal maintains them. Your argument is not valid. It's not the cost alone that count, but the benefits minus the costs. Imagine your a
187.
by ckuehne 18y ago
Wicket. If database is involved wicket+databinder.
188.
by ckuehne 18y ago
"How is it possible for someone to get a Ph.D. without picking up even a trace of scientific literacy?" One word: humanities.
189.
by ckuehne 19y ago
Maybe a bit more enlightening (if you read further than the opening quote) http://www.techcentralstation.com/article.aspx?id=120302A
190.
by ckuehne 19y ago
It's funny how every response in this thread confirms the three reasons mentioned in the article - in particular reason one: cognitive dissonance.
191.
by ckuehne 19y ago
I guess your school sucked. Red-black trees ARE binary search trees. Also: the worst case behavior of a hash table is in fact worse than that of a balanced (red-black tree, b-tree, avl-tree) search tree.