Feb. 7, 2014
10:33 p.m.
On Sat, 08 Feb 2014 06:50:29 +0900 "Stephen J. Turnbull" <stephen@xemacs.org> wrote:
Certainly, it would be possible to keep an additional start pointer, and advance that for deletions at position 0, then use that space for insertions at 0 (or perhaps "early" in the list) if available.
Possible, and quite reasonable actually.
But the OP refers to *allocation*, and specifically disallows "reserving space".
Ok, so you're arguing about a misunderstanding by the OP about how memory allocation works. That doesn't mean that overallocating at the front is any more difficult than overallocating at the end is (the latter being of course already implemented by the list datatype). Regards Antoine.