in reply to Algorithms, Datastructures and syntax

I've graduated in the field of Algorithms and Datastructures, and done academic research in that field for four years. I've always considered algorithms and datastructures to be equivalent. If I give you the datastructure, the algorithm is usually obvious, and visa verca.

Both algorithm and datastructure are language independent. Claiming they are language specific is saying that plays are language specific. A "for loop" is not an algorithm, for the same reason a "sentence" isn't a novel.

Abigail

  • Comment on Re: Algorithms, Datastructures and syntax

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: Re: Algorithms, Datastructures and syntax
by Anonymous Monk on Apr 04, 2003 at 16:07 UTC
    Could you not say that a for loop is an algorithm for counting from one number to another number? Or perhaps an algorithm for repeating a particular piece of code a certain number of times? I think you can abstract a for loop into an algorithm. I dont think that there is much use to do so, but from the philosophers chair?
[reply]
      Wax practical, poetic even, not philosophical, otherwise how do you know all those program you wrote really exist and aren't a dream? (don't try to answer, just forget philosophy, it's got no place among programming in the real world -- it's not practical).

      MJD says you can't just make shit up and expect the computer to know what you mean, retardo!
      I run a Win32 PPM repository for perl 5.6x+5.8x. I take requests.
      ** The Third rule of perl club is a statement of fact: pod is sexy.

[reply]

In Section Meditations