[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