Author: Ricardo Gibert
Date: 08:59:17 05/30/99
Go up one level in this thread
Oops! I forgot to include a couple of points. Sorry. Since, you haven't answered my prevoius post yet, you are technically still left with the last word. > As you 'should' well know some hash tables are variable in size and in such cases it is silly to limit them with a many-to-one mapping in such cases, M=N and even M<N is possible. > The fundamentally, the error you are making is the scattering out of keys is in and of itself a desirable property, distinct from a one-to-many mapping. For example, just this property is used in skip lists. Hashing there is a way of using probability to keep the tree balanced. Many-to-one business is irrelevant there. > OK that's all folks. I mean it this time
This page took 0 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.