Erlang standard library quirks
Ulf Wiger (AL/EAB)
Wed Feb 8 19:11:20 CET 2006
> > dict is worse, with just a snooty
> > The representation of a dictionary is not defined.
> > it may as well say "don't you worry about that". Turns out
> > it's a hash (2).
> (Snooty reply) One reason for having an abstract data type
> like dict IS to hide the internal representation so that
> users don't go in and fiddle with things they should best leave
Of course, if the documentation of an abstract data type refuses
to say anything about complexity, would you say it's generally
safe to assume that it can be used for large data sets? (:
More information about the erlang-questions