| commit | 79080bdf532d1fb445432b973df99ba9b068de4b | |
| author | strange <kawk256@gmail.com> | |
| Fri, 12 Feb 2010 07:46:47 +0000 (12 00:46 -0700) | ||
| committer | strange <kawk256@gmail.com> | |
| Fri, 12 Feb 2010 07:46:47 +0000 (12 00:46 -0700) | ||
| tree | 8fca7dfa3be80774a3d2e1b3f8a7e8ba99967527 | treesnapshot (tar.gz zip) |
| parent | 328b7674353ee8bda0b1bb20fbe182bdec54f5ab | commitdiff |
I just realized something . . .
. . . BiTreeNodes don't actually have to store their addresses, do they? I
suppose it depends on if I'm going to be doing any lookups from subtree heads,
rather than entire tree heads . . .
I don't think I am, to be honest. If that's true, then I can get rid of a huge
hassle . . . which, I think, is a good idea.
Watch me eat those words in, hmm. Three days.
. . . BiTreeNodes don't actually have to store their addresses, do they? I
suppose it depends on if I'm going to be doing any lookups from subtree heads,
rather than entire tree heads . . .
I don't think I am, to be honest. If that's true, then I can get rid of a huge
hassle . . . which, I think, is a good idea.
Watch me eat those words in, hmm. Three days.