Talk:Collections: Difference between revisions
→Request for Deletion
(→Racket and laundry lists: Another way?) |
|||
| (One intermediate revision by one other user not shown) | |||
Line 21:
==Problem with OO and C==
Surely C is not an OO language and so should not be said to have classes and methods. Would it not be better to state that there are a number of functions that manipulate strings and are mostly named with a prefix of "str". --[[User:Paddy3118|Paddy3118]] 06:24, 5 June 2012 (UTC)
== Request for Deletion ==
I challenge the existence of this page.
According to Wikipedia [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collection_(abstract_data_type)#Abstract_concept_vs._implementation ''collections'' is a concept], an idea, creating another ''abstraction layer'' on top of the actual implementation like an [[array]] or [[linked list]].
This abstraction layer creates an [[interface]] to operate on an unordered aggregation of data, so the actual implementation can be ''swapped without'' breaking anything.
Hence there is no “idiomatic solution” of this “task”, but infinitely many:
This page virtually ''reproduces'' all contents of [[:Category: Data Structures]] in ''one page''.
That’s pretty counterproductive.
I therefore nominate this page for deletion (or, better, transformation into a disambiguation/explanation page).
<br/>
‑‑[[User:Root|Root]] ([[User talk:Root|talk]]) 23:56, 4 March 2022 (UTC)
:Agreed but with so many entries difficult to change. The essence of a collection is the ability to perform common actions using syntax independent of the physical structure e.g. Array, List, or Set. This could be by the language supporting for n in Collection, by enumerators, or whatever. Encouraging solutions that name the language's collections to demonstrate this ability would improve the task.--[[User:Nigel Galloway|Nigel Galloway]] ([[User talk:Nigel Galloway|talk]]) 10:09, 5 March 2022 (UTC)
| |||