Message181152
> > 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? |
|
Date |
User |
Action |
Args |
2013-02-02 09:22:42 | pitrou | set | recipients:
+ pitrou, rhettinger, eric.snow, Ramchandra Apte, serhiy.storchaka |
2013-02-02 09:22:42 | pitrou | link | issue17100 messages |
2013-02-02 09:22:41 | pitrou | create | |
|