[boost] Re: unions

From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-10-08 17:06:06

"E. Gladyshev" <egladysh_at_[hidden]> writes:

> --- David Abrahams <dave_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> [...]
>> 
>> Please consult any basic textbook on algorithm complexity.  No offense
>> intended, but if we can't agree on O(N) == O(k * N), I think we'll
>> never agree on anything and I don't see any point in continuing this
>> conversation.
>
> Of course I are right, I was just teasing sorry.

Oh.  I should have a better sense of humor about that, but my time is
so short these days...

> You were paranoid about me using word "behavior"
> I was paranoid about 'k'; technically you should 
> have said that k is *independent* of N.
> I liked your "o-n-squared-equals-o-one-ly" proof though.
>
> I think you and I agree that variant should not have a special
> "first-type switch"?

Yes. However, I prefer that to anything other than "optimizing
whenever an optimization is possible", which is where we may differ.

-- 
Dave Abrahams
Boost Consulting
www.boost-consulting.com