• From: "Martin v. Loewis" <martin@l...>
• To: justin@v...
• Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2001 23:29:22 +0200

> Depends on your hashing implementation and then the bucket handling (ie
> making sure the map is big enough in the first place to support all the
> attributes without having to re-hash). As most parsers are likely to use
> the standard java.util.HashMap, then probably not as it's impl isn't the
> worlds best. 

As a quantitative statement, that is probably true. I just like to
point out that some parsers use perhaps STL maps, and others use
UserDict objects, yet others custom structs.

Please think in abstract data types, not in the implementations that
Java gave you. To provide an associative array, hash tables are just
one option - another option is to use a tree, or a linear list.

Regards,
Martin

• References:
  • Re: attribute order (RE: Syntax Sugar and XML information models)
    • From: Rick Jelliffe <ricko@a...>
  • RE: attribute order (RE: Syntax Sugar and XML information models)
    • From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>
  • Re: attribute order (RE: Syntax Sugar and XML information models)
    • From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>
  • Re: attribute order (RE: Syntax Sugar and XML informationmodels)
    • From: Justin Couch <justin@v...>

• Prev by Date: Re: attribute order (RE: Syntax Sugar and XML information models)
• Next by Date: Re: multiple types
• Previous by thread: Re: attribute order (RE: Syntax Sugar and XML informationmodels)
• Next by thread: Re: attribute order (RE: Syntax Sugar and XML information models)
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread