1. Re: Ideas
- Posted by Arthur Adamson <euclid at ISOC.NET>
Jun 29, 1998
-
Last edited Jun 30, 1998
At 03:02 AM 6/29/98 -0400, Falkon wrote:
>From: Andy Kurnia
>> That's something "simple", i.e. something I would want to make.
>> Details please?
>
> Well, working out the details is what would make it a project for you.
><g>
>You could handle byte-sized variables either through allocate or just by
>storing 4 of them in an atom and manipulating the appropriate 8 bits as
>needed. So that if you read in a 100k binary file to a sequence, it'd take
>102400 bytes of memory instead of 409600. But either way, you'd need to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>functionality of a relational database with a tree-structure and/or chart
>organizer, and improving a bit. I think Euphoria's flexibility makes it
>about the perfect language to do it in.
>
Not exactly on the same subject but related...
I have been working on a tree to store words. Euphoria's sequences
etc are ideal in many ways. However the straight forward use of sequences to
implement a tree with character storage and pointers led to 70 bytes per
character which seemed excessive. So I have been battling hard to improve
it. I now have a tree which can store 50000 plus words of average length 7.8
characters (the RDS spell check dictionary) with a tree data plus pointer
plus Euphoria-overhead storage usage of only 1.3 bytes per character and
.00009 seconds average (DOS 6.21 & Pentium 120 mhz)
check-a-word-for-existence-time. I use lots of bit-twiddling as suggested
above.
This prog is not quite ready for general posting...though there is
an slower, bulkier version posted at RDS, ternary.zip. If anyone can't wait
for the next update to be posted, let me know your e-mail addr and I will
send you a current copy.
BTW, if anyone has a larger file of words (for testing), say 500000
or so, please tell me how to get a copy (reply to euclid at isoc.net).
Arthur P. Adamson, The Engine Man, euclid at isoc.net
