Date: Fri, 9 Apr 2010 18:52:04 +0400 From: Alexander Churanov <alexanderchuranov@gmail.com> To: Leinier Cruz Salfran <salfrancl.listas@gmail.com> Cc: freebsd-hackers <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: c question Message-ID: <x2z3cb459ed1004090752q70f6315fqb53ba36d26ce9c12@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <l2ga2585ef1004090709u821fc979i226a3125d9da8251@mail.gmail.com> References: <l2ga2585ef1004090709u821fc979i226a3125d9da8251@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
2010/4/9 Leinier Cruz Salfran <salfrancl.listas@gmail.com>
> - use a matrix is faster than use a linked list?
>
> example:
>
> char *szColumnName[10];
> unsigned short iColumnAge[10];
>
>
> struct _llList {
> struct _llList *prev, *next;
> char szName[64];
> unsigned short iAge;
> };
Leinier ,
This depends on what kind of operations are performed. For sequential
traversing, both are very appropriate. However, you can not perform a binary
search on a list. You also can not combine two arrays into a single one with
constant complexity.
Lists also have greater memory overhead for small structures.
My advice: always use arrays.
Use lists if:
1) Copying items when the dynamic arrays grows is inappropriate.
2) List-specific operations like O(1) splicing or O(1) insertions and
deletions are required.
Alexander Churanov
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?x2z3cb459ed1004090752q70f6315fqb53ba36d26ce9c12>