From: "Haase, Konstantin" <Konstantin.Haase@...>
Date: 2011-10-07T07:01:25+09:00
Subject: [ruby-core:40000] Re: [Ruby 1.9 - Feature #2348] RBTree Should be Added to the Standard Library

SortedSet could then depend on it properly instead of the voodoo code that ships with Ruby atm.

Konstantin

On Oct 6, 2011, at 13:22 , B Kelly wrote:

> 
> Issue #2348 has been updated by B Kelly.
> 
> 
> I wholeheartedly agree about the usefulness of the data structure.
> 
> I'm hesitant to type this, because I don't want to impede RBTree's path toward first-class citizenship.
> 
> But last time I checked there appeared to be some API deficiencies that significantly limited RBTree's potential usefulness:
> 
> http://blade.nagaokaut.ac.jp/cgi-bin/scat.rb/ruby/ruby-core/28860
> http://blade.nagaokaut.ac.jp/cgi-bin/scat.rb/ruby/ruby-core/28879
> 
> Although I suppose it's possible these could be addressed at a later date?
> 
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Bill
> 
> ----------------------------------------
> Feature #2348: RBTree Should be Added to the Standard Library
> http://redmine.ruby-lang.org/issues/2348
> 
> Author: James Gray
> Status: Assigned
> Priority: Normal
> Assignee: Yukihiro Matsumoto
> Category: lib
> Target version: 1.9.x
> 
> 
> =begin
> The merits of this library have been discussed on Ruby core, with the strengths best summarized by this post:
> 
> http://blade.nagaokaut.ac.jp/cgi-bin/scat.rb/ruby/ruby-core/26602
> 
> RBTree has now been fixed to run on Ruby 1.9:
> 
> http://github.com/skade/rbtree
> 
> I think we should now give serious consideration to bringing it into the standard library.
> =end
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> http://redmine.ruby-lang.org
>