Open farteryhr opened 1 year ago
That makes a lot of sense, I will look into how it can be done
On Mon, 13 Mar 2023 at 11:15, farteryhr @.***> wrote:
in C++ STL's term, don't invalidate iterators on removal, except those pointing on the removed node.
(if the nodes returned in various APIs are to be regarded as "iterators", with the assumption that users don't tamper with it, which is common in the javascript world)
the modification is rather straightforward. in remove function, instead of assigning the data and key of the "lifted node" to the "deleted node", maintain the left, right, parentreferences to/from the "lifted node" and cut the "deleted node"'s outward references (but preserve the key and data).
within my knowledge of the currently implemented APIs, the remove operation is the only one that breaks this. (more care may be needed if split, join are to be added)
this allows iterator usages to work (there might not be much, but i really have code using iterators the iterator way). without this property, though workaround exists, one has to find by .key, prev/next, store .key again and again, that's hurts both readability (+code size) and overall performance.
also returning the node deleted makes more sense (may be inserted again with the fictional insertNode API).
there might be performance degradation due to more operations to do. but since the remove operation is the fastest operation here, it's nice to have this property with a little price. or maybe removeGracefully?
— Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/w8r/avl/issues/55, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAAGSBHMN6Y5772HQ3Q433TW33XVJANCNFSM6AAAAAAVY3P6PM . You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.Message ID: @.***>
some other doc fixes
insert
while it returns Node
.data
and value
is not consistentrange
is not specifiedand further suggestions mainly due to my own taste (on those not mentioned here, your library is more of my taste than any other avl tree libraries found on npm):
noDuplicate
by default, hmm... yes i prefer it... "[multi]set" should be explicitly specified.insert
could accept a third boolean argument meaning "don't update data/value
if the key
already exists" (defaults to false, that means do update) (only works when noDuplicates
? or works even when duplicates allowed?)insertNode
(if it's to be added) errors when key
exists and noDuplicates
is set, because we can't decide which to keep, since both could be regarded as iterators.find
, in my opinion it's better to be supported by an optional argument (rather than 4 more APIs with various confusing names, such as xxBound), namely firstGT, firstGE, lastLT, lastLE
, where the default argument just means Equal
(but returns arbitrary one in the equal range when duplicates allowed)rangeByNodes
, that kinda matches c++ iterators on multiset, using nodes returned by extended find
.range*
to use [lo,hi)
(or say [start,end)
) by default, no-op when lo
is null, iterate to end whenhi
is null. better to have an argument reversed
. even better another inclusive
? (i admit there might be some holy war here)pop
to popMin
, because javascript array pop
s the last value and shift
s the first value, but on a tree we don't shift
. it's better to be clear here.
in C++ STL's term, don't invalidate iterators on removal of elements, except those pointing to the removed node.
(if the nodes returned in various APIs are to be regarded as "iterators", with the assumption that users don't tamper with it, which is common in the javascript world)
the modification is rather straightforward. in remove function, instead of assigning the
data
andkey
of the "lifted node" to the "deleted node", maintain theleft, right, parent
references to/from the "lifted node" and cut the "deleted node"'s outward references (but preserve the key and data).within my knowledge of the currently implemented APIs, the remove operation is the only one that breaks this. (more care may be needed if
split, join
are to be added)this allows iterator usages to work (there might not be much, but i really have code using iterators the iterator way). without this property, though workaround exists, one has to find by
.key
, prev/next, store.key
again and again, that's hurts both readability (+code size) and overall performance.also returning the node deleted makes more sense (may be inserted again with the fictional
insertNode
API).there might be performance degradation due to more operations to do. but since the remove operation is the fastest operation here, it's nice to have this property with a little price. or maybe
removeGracefully
?