On Mon, Dec 13, 2010 at 5:51 PM, Julien Signoles wrote: > Hello, > > 2010/12/13 Eray Ozkural > > Oww, is the imperative implementation using hash tables or maps then? >> > > Imperative implementations use hash tables (except the ones called Matrix > which use arrays of bitvectors) while persistent implementations use maps. > Yes, I noticed, the incidence matrix is pretty good for dense unlabeled graphs, that's probably better than the one boost provides. > > >> Shouldn't be too hard to plug your own in ocamlgraph if needed. >> > > OcamlGraph is designed for such an use : each algorithm provided by the > library is a functor parameterized by the required graph operations > (iterators over vertices and edges, ...). Thus you can provide your own in > an easy way. > > Hope this helps, > Sure it does. I've used ocamlgraph in a number of projects and I'm very glad with the functor interface. It feels right! One of the big reasons I'm using ocaml is the higher-order module feature, it's great for writing truly extensible and re-usable software. Regarding the above discussion, hash table is actually appropriate for a very large number of use-cases and I've seen it recommended it in a software engineering journal. That's true especially if you need to query individual edges, although many classical graph algorithms work best with an adjacency list representation, which can be easily implemented as you suggest. Best, -- Eray Ozkural, PhD candidate. Comp. Sci. Dept., Bilkent University, Ankara http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ai-philosophy http://myspace.com/arizanesil http://myspace.com/malfunct