Anonymous user
Rosetta Code:Village Pump/Task creation process discussion: Difference between revisions
Rosetta Code:Village Pump/Task creation process discussion (view source)
Revision as of 23:45, 26 April 2009
, 15 years ago→New issue, if it is an issue: about how the history is
(→Three types of tasks: What I like about RC as reader & contributer.) |
(→New issue, if it is an issue: about how the history is) |
||
Line 53:
::Partly I agree. But the lib should be widespread and common (considered almost standard) (?), and I've found no such a lib (if you know one, tell me —it must be simple, not like SunriseDD I've found... it is overdimensioned for this and other tasks... but as last resort I will try to learn and use this). If widespread or ''almost'' standard are not requirements, I would upload my "hash-table" implementation to my site and drop a link to it, I suppose theoretically there's nothing wrong in doing so, since we are not really interested in performance or what (what about this? Can I use libs I've created, of course as GPLed code?). The implementation's aim of my code was to be able to write the algorithm almost as a translation of Java code. --[[User:ShinTakezou|ShinTakezou]] 00:03, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
:::I suppose I could use [http://uthash.sourceforge.net/ uthash], it seems simple enough. Going to adapt the code, but not this night:D --[[User:ShinTakezou|ShinTakezou]] 00:25, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
:::: Just to say as currently ended: I've used Judy library... for LZW, I've created a subtask for "binary strings" (opinionable), which proved to be usable (not elegantly) in other tasks too; while I've kept a specialized "dictionary" implementation for LZW. --[[User:ShinTakezou|ShinTakezou]] 23:45, 26 April 2009 (UTC)
| |||