Re: Sets and Lists, again
From: x <x_at_not-exists.org>
Date: Tue, 23 May 2006 10:41:37 +0300
Message-ID: <e4ue6n$7e6$1_at_emma.aioe.org>
Date: Tue, 23 May 2006 10:41:37 +0300
Message-ID: <e4ue6n$7e6$1_at_emma.aioe.org>
"JOG" <jog_at_cs.nott.ac.uk> wrote in message
news:1148350125.906566.265620_at_i39g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> In the end a list is 'this, then that, then t'other' - purely ordinal.
> As such here I agree with Gene - creating an index to identify the
> location of each item in that list is a physical accessor. To obtain
> the third element in a list, for example, one processes 'start_head,
> get_next, get_next'. Any cardinal access to 'element[3]' is surely a
> physical, and not logical, shortcut.
But you have to admit this is random access - a step farther from the navigational (sequential) access. Received on Tue May 23 2006 - 09:41:37 CEST