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]

Re: AVL vs Red-Black tree

From: Paolo Carlini <pcarlini at suse dot de>
To: Benjamin Kosnik <bkoz at redhat dot com>
Cc: "Daniel K. O." <danielosmari at gmail dot com>, libstdc++ at gcc dot gnu dot org
Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2007 13:59:14 +0100
Subject: Re: AVL vs Red-Black tree
References: <b8d9e17f0702071310ie9d9ae3tfdadacdeef348b77@mail.gmail.com> <45D45110.3020102@redhat.com>

Benjamin Kosnik wrote:

I'd be more interested in looking at this if you could provide performance measurements based on libstdc++'s own performance testsuite. Ie, "make check-performance."

Good point.

If you feel that coverage in that testsuite is lacking, please feel free to suggest improvements...

In other terms, as soon as the legal issues are cleared, it would be *very* nice if Daniel could start with contributing performance testcases clearly showing the differences between an implementation based on Red-Black trees and one based on AVL trees. I think something is mostly ready, in the tarball on sourceforge.

Paolo.

References:
- AVL vs Red-Black tree
  - From: Daniel K. O.
- Re: AVL vs Red-Black tree
  - From: Benjamin Kosnik

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]