Prev: Deserialization issue
Next: Using C# to access TextToColumns in Excel Interop
From: Tony Johansson on 16 Oct 2008 14:53
Hello!

What actually does this sentence mean?
Create a linked-list generic class that enables you to create a chain of
different objects types.

When I create a linked-list generic class for example with the string type.
I do the following.
List<string> myList = new List<string>();

So what can they mean when they say different objects types.

Does it sounds reasonable that they mean a linked-list of object like this
List<Object> myList = new List<Object>();

//Tony


From: Peter Duniho on 16 Oct 2008 15:11
On Thu, 16 Oct 2008 11:53:17 -0700, Tony Johansson
<johansson.andersson(a)telia.com> wrote:

> What actually does this sentence mean?
> Create a linked-list generic class that enables you to create a chain of
> different objects types.

Impossible to say for sure without more context.

> When I create a linked-list generic class for example with the string
> type.
> I do the following.
> List<string> myList = new List<string>();

That's not a linked list.

> So what can they mean when they say different objects types.
>
> Does it sounds reasonable that they mean a linked-list of object like
> this
> List<Object> myList = new List<Object>();

No. But perhaps they mean this:

LinkedList<object> myList = new LinkedList<object>();

Pete
From: Tony Johansson on 16 Oct 2008 16:12
Hello!

I just wonder what advantages does a LinkedList<T> have compared to List<T>
?

So is it possible to say in general when to use LinkedList<T>?

//Tony


"Peter Duniho" <NpOeStPeAdM(a)nnowslpianmk.com> skrev i meddelandet
news:op.ui4sx4k08jd0ej(a)petes-computer.local...
> On Thu, 16 Oct 2008 11:53:17 -0700, Tony Johansson
> <johansson.andersson(a)telia.com> wrote:
>
>> What actually does this sentence mean?
>> Create a linked-list generic class that enables you to create a chain of
>> different objects types.
>
> Impossible to say for sure without more context.
>
>> When I create a linked-list generic class for example with the string
>> type.
>> I do the following.
>> List<string> myList = new List<string>();
>
> That's not a linked list.
>
>> So what can they mean when they say different objects types.
>>
>> Does it sounds reasonable that they mean a linked-list of object like
>> this
>> List<Object> myList = new List<Object>();
>
> No. But perhaps they mean this:
>
> LinkedList<object> myList = new LinkedList<object>();
>
> Pete


From: Peter Duniho on 16 Oct 2008 16:40
On Thu, 16 Oct 2008 13:12:27 -0700, Tony Johansson
<johansson.andersson(a)telia.com> wrote:

> I just wonder what advantages does a LinkedList<T> have compared to
> List<T>

The primary advantage is that it's much faster (and simpler) to insert
into or remove an element from a LinkedList<T> than into a List<T>, except
for operations at the very end of the list. Those operations for a
List<T> require the entire contents of the data structure after the point
of modification to be copied, whereas for a LinkedList<T> those operations
can always be completed in constant time, just by modifying a fixed number
of pointers.

> So is it possible to say in general when to use LinkedList<T>?

LinkedList<T> has more overhead. So I would only use it when I expect to
spend a lot of time modifying the list in ways other than adding or
removing from the very end. Otherwise, List<T> is probably preferable.

Pete
From: Arne Vajhøj on 16 Oct 2008 19:39
Tony Johansson wrote:
> What actually does this sentence mean?
> Create a linked-list generic class that enables you to create a chain of
> different objects types.

I think they want you to write your own LinkedList<> implementation.

Arne
 | 
Pages: 1
Prev: Deserialization issue
Next: Using C# to access TextToColumns in Excel Interop