➜

This issue tracker has been migrated to GitHub, and is currently read-only.
For more information, see the GitHub FAQs in the Python's Developer Guide.

Author pitrou
Recipients Ramchandra Apte, eric.snow, pitrou, rhettinger, serhiy.storchaka
Date 2013-02-02.09:22:41
SpamBayes Score -1.0
Marked as misclassified Yes
Message-id <1359796789.3476.9.camel@localhost.localdomain>
In-reply-to <1359796279.24.0.604271302584.issue17100@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
Content 
> > But rotate_at() / rotate_after() can probably be O(1), unless I'm
> missing something.
> 
> Hmm, perhaps. But only for current implementation. With more effective
> deque-like implementation (when linked list items grouped in
> fixed-size chunks) it will be O(n).

Does your deque-like implementation preserve O(1) deletion?
History
Date User Action Args
2013-02-02 09:22:42pitrousetrecipients: + pitrou, rhettinger, eric.snow, Ramchandra Apte, serhiy.storchaka
2013-02-02 09:22:42pitroulinkissue17100 messages
2013-02-02 09:22:41pitroucreate