From 2236fec907eb0bfcec7649e3718b26a56fc4e158 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: h7x4 Date: Fri, 27 Sep 2024 21:59:11 +0200 Subject: [PATCH] README: update function comment --- README.md | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/README.md b/README.md index 68299d0..08b8ce7 100644 --- a/README.md +++ b/README.md @@ -18,7 +18,7 @@ solution that could be applied to other functions as well, without too much over | Name | Expected complexity | Comment | |------------------|---------------------|---------| | `hasAttr` | O(1) | this is the only real kind of lookup table we have with low overhead. I need to verify that it is actually amortized O(1) | -| `catAttrs` | O(n) | could this fix the O(n^2) fold collection resizing problem? | +| `catAttrs` | O(n) | `filter`-like, [attrs] -> Attrs. Can remove many items at once, as well as convert from list to attrs | | `concatMap` | O(n * f) | could this be used with attr lookups to fix the O(n^2) fold collection resizing problem? | | `concatLists` | O(n) | could this be used with attr lookups to fix the O(n^2) fold collection resizing problem? | | `filter` | O(n * f) | could potentially remove many items at once without realloc? |