Lie Ryan wrote: > Isn't ordered dictionary essentially also an "always sorted" container? > It is always sorted depending on the order of insertion? I can't see any > technical reason why the data structure can't accommodate them both. Can > you point me to a discussion on this? Appending an item at the end of a sequence is O(1), no search required. Inserting an item at a random 'sorted' point requires at best an O(logN) search. Insertion itself is O(1) to O(N) depending on the structure.
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4