This is the mail archive of the libstdc++@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the libstdc++ project.
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |
Other format: | [Raw text] |
To be clear, it's not about *me*, it's about implementing something well known and of known properties. That means, the pointer above must be part of the documentation, as a comment in the code, at least. Likewise for any other extension we may add in the future.On this page: http://www.movsd.com/bm.htm you can find a complete description of the 3 different kinds of tables which _may_ be used in any Boyer Moore algorithm implementation. I am using the Good Character & Bad Character shift tables ONLY. As you can see from the description, that's perfectly fine to do.
No, we don't want to do that. Because using a map like that means that all the complexity figures of the Boyer-Moore algorithm are not valid anymore. Therefore, either we find a better way to deal with that problem (I suggest we don't give up so quickly, no reason to rush) or we have to deliver the algorithm only for chars.Also, I think we have to do something for that unordered_map, I don't think covering the general case via lookups in a map leads to something close to the original spirit, in any possible sense...Nope, it doesn't because the algorithm wasn't meant for any search, but was designed for string searching in particular. Hence the use of the static tables, etc.... However, using the unordered_map<> as an approximation to preserve generality will only hurt the performance and not the correctness. Again, since this is an extension, people will use it only for strings if we document it accordingly.
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |