Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

--- courses:cs211:winter2018:journals:goldm:ch2.1 [2018/01/19 03:59] – [2.1] admin
+++ courses:cs211:winter2018:journals:goldm:ch2.1 [2018/01/23 01:23] (current) – goldm
@@ Line 14: / Line 14: @@
 This section, once again, did not merely detail a long-winded algorithm. As such, it gets a 7/10.
+===== 2.3: Implementing the Stable Matching Problem Using Lists and Arrays =====
+The reading begins to bridge the gap from analysis on paper to actual efficient implementation of algorithms. In the section, the complexity of different array methods are discussed. As a result, the shortcomings of arrays, specifically dynamically managing the data in them, comes to light. As such, another method of implementation, linked lists, is discussed. Linked lists allow for items to more easily be added and removed. As far as I am aware, there is no perfect data type. As such, there are times where the fact that linked lists do not support constant time indexing make them inferior to arrays. The rest of the section details how these data types can be used to ensure that the algorithm can run in O(n squared) as was originally suggested by the pen and paper analysis.
+One thought that I have in response to this section pertains to hashing. Through internships and discussion with upper level students, I have heard a lot about how often times things like hash sorts and hash maps can be significantly more efficient than other mappings and sorts, but I have not really been exposed to them through my classes at W&L. So, I am curious what benefits/trade offs things of that nature have. Additionally, are there any other things of that nature, which while not often discussed, allow for efficient implementation.
+I generally find data structures and implementation extremely important, so I give this section a 7/10.