9 May
2011
9 May
'11
2:25 p.m.
--- On Fri, 5/6/11, Erik Erlandson wrote:
ply() could easily be a free function, and would have O(depth) complexity. The problem I saw with depth() as a stateless function is that its complexity would be linear on the size of the (sub)tree, unless I'm missing something. (I mitigated that problem by maintaining some depth-histogram structures that can be updated in O(depth) time for various operations)
Interesting. BTW, what's the difference between depth and ply? I thought they were interchangeable (and other users might think so, too). Cromwell D. Enage