[Haskell-cafe] STM Skip list implementation

Tom Davies tgdavies at gmail.com
Wed Mar 17 20:39:23 EDT 2010

On 18/03/2010, at 9:49 AM, Matthias Görgens wrote:

> Hi Peter,
> Interesting.  Your skip lists do not need re-balancing, but they do
> destructive updates.  I wonder which factor outweighs the other in
> practise.

Isn't destructive update a feature in this case? i.e. these skip lists are designed for shared, mutable state. You could also have an immutable implementation, and in both cases not needing to rebalance helps -- less contention in the first instance and more sharing in the second.

More information about the Haskell-Cafe mailing list