|C Hashmap implementation Sean.Gillespie@bisonofborg.com (bison) (2007-04-23)|
|Re: C Hashmap implementation email@example.com (Vladimir Makarov) (2007-04-25)|
|Re: C Hashmap implementation firstname.lastname@example.org (cr88192) (2007-04-26)|
|Re: C Hashmap implementation Sean.Gillespie@bisonofborg.com (bison) (2007-04-26)|
|Re: C Hashmap implementation email@example.com (Christopher Diggins) (2007-04-26)|
|Re: C Hashmap implementation firstname.lastname@example.org (George Neuner) (2007-04-26)|
|Re: C Hashmap implementation email@example.com (Gene) (2007-04-26)|
|[3 later articles]|
|Date:||23 Apr 2007 07:52:27 -0400|
|Posted-Date:||23 Apr 2007 07:52:27 EDT|
Hello. I'm looking into hashmap implementations for a VM based
dynamically typed language. Since the implementation must allow me to
resize on demand, I am a bit confused about the various approaches.
Here is what I have found out so far:
Almost everyone I've talked to has said that Chained Hashmaps are much
easier to implement than Open Addressed maps.
Wikipedia suggests that an approach to resizing hashmaps is to
allocate space for a newer hashmap and copy elements from to the new
table, and in some cases do it incrementally.
Quick question about the last point: I'm curious about a starting
point. How much space should a hashmap allocate initially, and when
it's full...by how much would I typically increase it? I realize
there are lots of different answers here, so a good starting point
would really help out.
Return to the
Search the comp.compilers archives again.