GNU bug report logs - #5012
avl-tree.el enhancements

Previous Next

Full log

View this message in rfc822 format

From: help-debbugs <at> gnu.org (GNU bug Tracking System)
To: Glenn Morris <rgm <at> gnu.org>
Cc: tracker <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: bug#5015: closed (avl-tree.el enhancements)
Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2012 19:55:02 +0000

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Your message dated Thu, 23 Feb 2012 14:51:33 -0500
with message-id <jalintfhve.fsf <at> fencepost.gnu.org>
and subject line Re: bug#5012: avl-tree.el enhancements
has caused the debbugs.gnu.org bug report #5012,
regarding avl-tree.el enhancements
to be marked as done.

(If you believe you have received this mail in error, please contact
help-debbugs <at> gnu.org.)


-- 
5012: http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=5012
GNU Bug Tracking System
Contact help-debbugs <at> gnu.org with problems

[Message part 2 (message/rfc822, inline)]

From: Stefan Monnier <monnier <at> iro.umontreal.ca>
To: Toby Cubitt <tsc25 <at> cantab.net>
Cc: bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org
Subject: Re: avl-tree.el enhancements
Date: Sun, 22 Nov 2009 22:44:22 -0500

> I've initiated the copyright paperwork process, so hopefully you should
> have everything you need soon.

Great.  In the mean time, here's some comment about the first patch.

> -;; along with GNU Emacs.  If not, see <http://www.gnu.org/licenses/>.
> +;; along with GNU Emacs. If not, see <http://www.gnu.org/licenses/>.

This change is wrong.  Our convention is to use two spaces after a full
stop.  See sentence-end-double-space.  Please try to follow the same
convention in the text you contribute.

> -  `(avl-tree--node-left (avl-tree--dummyroot tree)))
> +  `(avl-tree--node-left (avl-tree--dummyroot ,tree)))

Good catch, thanks.

> +;; ----------------------------------------------------------------
> +;; Convenience macros
> +
> +(defmacro avl-tree--switch-dir (dir)
> +  ;; Return opposite direction to DIR (0 = left, 1 = right).
> +  `(- 1 ,dir))

Hmm... using integers for "direction" isn't pretty.  I see it mostly
comes from its use in avl-tree--node-branch.  I guess we'll have to live
with it for now...

> +(defun avl-tree--del-balance (node branch dir)
> +  ;; Rebalance a tree at the left (BRANCH=0) or right (BRANCH=1) child
> +  ;; of NODE after deleting from the left (DIR=0) or right (DIR=1)
> +  ;; sub-tree of that child [or is it vice-versa?]. Return t if the
> +  ;; height of the tree has shrunk.

This comment should be a docstring instead.

> +(defun avl-tree--mapc (map-function root dir)
>    ;; Apply MAP-FUNCTION to all nodes in the tree starting with ROOT.
> -  ;; The function is applied in-order.
> +  ;; The function is applied in-order, either ascending (DIR=0) or
> +  ;; descending (DIR=1).
>    ;;
>    ;; Note: MAP-FUNCTION is applied to the node and not to the data itself.
>    ;; INTERNAL USE ONLY.

Same here: this should be a docstring, rather than a comment.

> -(defalias 'avl-tree-compare-function 'avl-tree--cmpfun
> -  "Return the comparison function for the avl tree TREE.
> +;; define public alias for constructors so that we can set docstring
> +(defalias 'avl-tree-create 'avl-tree--create
> +  "Create an empty avl tree.
> +COMPARE-FUNCTION is a function which takes two arguments, A and B,
> +and returns non-nil if A is less than B, and nil otherwise.")
> +
 
> -\(fn TREE)")
> +(defalias 'avl-tree-compare-function 'avl-tree--cmpfun
> +  "Return the comparison function for the avl tree TREE.")

Why exactly do you remove the \(fn TREE) thingy at the end?
 
> -  (let ((node (avl-tree--root tree))
> -        (compare-function (avl-tree--cmpfun tree))
> -        found)
> -    (while (and node
> -                (not found))
> -      (cond
> -       ((funcall compare-function data (avl-tree--node-data node))
> -        (setq node (avl-tree--node-left node)))
> -       ((funcall compare-function (avl-tree--node-data node) data)
> -        (setq node (avl-tree--node-right node)))
> -       (t
> -        (setq found t))))
> -    (if node
> -        (avl-tree--node-data node)
> +  (let ((node (avl-tree--root tree)))
> +    (catch 'found
> +      (while node
> +	(cond
> +	 ((funcall (avl-tree--cmpfun tree)
> +		   data (avl-tree--node-data node))
> +	  (setq node (avl-tree--node-left node)))
> +	 ((funcall (avl-tree--cmpfun tree)
> +		   (avl-tree--node-data node) data)
> +	  (setq node (avl-tree--node-right node)))
> +	 (t (throw 'found (avl-tree--node-data node)))))
>        nil)))

Why do you move the (avl-tree--cmpfun tree) back into the loop?
Have you found it to be paradoxically more efficient?

Overall, looks good.  Please provide a ChangeLog entry for it as well.


        Stefan

[Message part 3 (message/rfc822, inline)]

From: Glenn Morris <rgm <at> gnu.org>
To: 5012-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#5012: avl-tree.el enhancements
Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2012 14:51:33 -0500

Version: 24.1

Installed 2011-05-27.

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.