[fpc-pascal] Re: State of fcl-stl generics lib
Florian Klämpfl
florian at freepascal.org
Sun Jan 20 15:44:36 CET 2013
Am 20.01.2013 15:37, schrieb Michael Van Canneyt:
>
>
> On Sun, 20 Jan 2013, Florian Klämpfl wrote:
>
>> Am 20.01.2013 15:16, schrieb Michael Van Canneyt:
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sun, 20 Jan 2013, Florian Klämpfl wrote:
>>>
>>>> Am 20.01.2013 14:47, schrieb Michael Van Canneyt:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ? Why not ? I see no difference with a list or collection ?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> A tree is something implementation specific while the fpc-stl is only
>>>>>> about opaque data structures. E.g. the fpc-stl supports TSet: but the
>>>>>> whole implementation is hidden. The user does not/need not to know
>>>>>> how
>>>>>> the set works internally. It could be a linked list, a tree,
>>>>>> whatever.
>>>>>
>>>>> For me, a tree is a data structure, just like a set, list, collection,
>>>>> queue, whatever.
>>>>
>>>> A tree is an implementation detail. For example a set could be
>>>> implemented using a tree.
>>>
>>> I understand you the first time :-)
>>>
>>> For me, a tree is at the same level as a set. Whatever models your data
>>> best.
>>
>> A set is defined by some properties and possible operations like that it
>> can contain each element only once, that it is possible to build
>> intersections, unions etc.
>
> Aha... That's a mathematical definition.
It is a definition, yes.
>
> So: A graph is also mathematically defined. And a tree is just a
> specialized graph.
So a number is also at the same level? It is also mathematically defined
:) So even ansi pascal has generics, it has numbers: integers and reals :)
>
> Stalemate :-)
More information about the fpc-pascal
mailing list