Re: avl-trees vs. hashes

[Klaus Schilling <Klaus.Schilling@home.ivm.de>]

Keith Wright writes:
 > > From: Klaus Schilling <Klaus.Schilling@home.ivm.de>
 > > Harvey J. Stein writes:
 > >  > 
 > >  > Nope.  Resizing hashtables are still O(1) for insertions.  See the
 > >  > previous discussions & 3 independently posted analyses.  God, I wish
 > >  > this list had a shorter turn-around time.
 > > 
 > > Even in the worst case, when all entries drop into the same bucket?
 > 
 > Obviously not.  Any claim of O(1) performance for hashtable insertion,
 > deletion, or re-size is average case assuming a random hash.  If you
 > are talking about hash-tables, you are not talking worst-case.

So when worrying about the worst case, doing lots of insertions, deletions,
ordering and the like, balanced trees are better, although they are not
implemented by the guile-core? 

	  Klaus Schilling