Author: Dann Corbit
Date: 10:13:21 05/09/01
If you have read my posts on news:comp.lang.c, you will have recognized that the fastest way to hit my hot button is to 'correct' someone's correct answer with a wrong answer. I suspect that the way O(f(n)) is taught simply must be different in other parts of the world or something. The understanding I got from school and from every book I have ever read seems a bit at odds with what many seem to believe. Now, I tend to go with an authority like Knuth etc. and just believe that their definition is the right one. But there is no "ANSI/ISO standard" on what this notation means, so there may be some other definitions floating around somewhere. Now, I don't apologize for the content of my posts, because (to the best of my knowlege) they are truthful or at least my closest undertanding thereof. It is (of course) possible that I am mistaken about some facet of algorithm analysis. While it is a major focus of my work, I have been wrong about major things in the past. Even so, I believe that my understanding is correct -- based solely on what I have been taught and what I have read. But I do apologize for the tone, since I was a bit antagonized and (thereafter) antagonistic. A point can be made politely just as well as harshly -- probably much better actually. Yet another proof that I am one of the worst possible choices for moderator of CCC.
This page took 0.01 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.