From: Martin Fuchs (martin-fuchs_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-06-16 16:03:35
Arkadiy Vertleyb wrote...
> This is a very interesting idea.
> However it has a problem within our current implementation, where sort
> is defined at compile time (sort list is the second parameter to the tuple
> template). The sort list defaults to the field list, and this is what you
> are using, so your sort list doesn't really reflect the sorting order.
> Since the sort list is a compile time notion, there is not much we can do
> fix it :0(
> Not having the proper sort list means your table will not work properly
> operators that require sorting, currently union, difference, intersection,
> Since a few people expressed concern that we do not support indexing, we
> going to discuss the issue in the nearest future. I think your idea may
> very nicely there. We can see that what you suggested can be implemented
> through indexing (with maybe slightly different interface).
Oh, I see. Currently the operations depend on sorted table content based
on the sort list, defaulting to all columns starting from the left on.
Well, I'm looking forward for your coming indexing implementation.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk