Asked  7 Months ago    Answers:  5   Viewed   29 times

Is it a linked list, an array? I searched around and only found people guessing. My C knowledge isn't good enough to look at the source code.



It's a dynamic array. Practical proof: Indexing takes (of course with extremely small differences (0.0013 µsecs!)) the same time regardless of index:

...>python -m timeit --setup="x = [None]*1000" "x[500]"
10000000 loops, best of 3: 0.0579 usec per loop

...>python -m timeit --setup="x = [None]*1000" "x[0]"
10000000 loops, best of 3: 0.0566 usec per loop

I would be astounded if IronPython or Jython used linked lists - they would ruin the performance of many many widely-used libraries built on the assumption that lists are dynamic arrays.

Tuesday, June 1, 2021
answered 7 Months ago

Using Reflector for .NET we can see:

public int IndexOf(T item)
    return Array.IndexOf<T>(this._items, item, 0, this._size);

public static int IndexOf<T>(T[] array, T value, int startIndex, int count)
    return EqualityComparer<T>.Default.IndexOf(array, value, startIndex, count);

internal virtual int IndexOf(T[] array, T value, int startIndex, int count)
    int num = startIndex + count;
    for (int i = startIndex; i < num; i++)
        if (this.Equals(array[i], value))
            return i;
    return -1;
Friday, July 23, 2021
answered 5 Months ago

My guess is that you would have to create your own subclass wrapper around the desired objects and re-implement __getitem__() to convert negative keys to None, and then call the superclass __getitem__

Note, what I am suggesting is to subclass existing custom classes, but NOT builtins like list or dict. This is simply to make a utility around another class, not to confuse the normal expected operations of a list type. It would be something you would want to use within a certain context for a period of time until your operations are complete. It is best to avoid making a globally different change that will confuse users of your code.


object.getitem(self, key)
Called to implement evaluation of self[key]. For sequence types, the accepted keys should be integers and slice objects. Note that the special interpretation of negative indexes (if the class wishes to emulate a sequence type) is up to the getitem() method. If key is of an inappropriate type, TypeError may be raised; if of a value outside the set of indexes for the sequence (after any special interpretation of negative values), IndexError should be raised. For mapping types, if key is missing (not in the container), KeyError should be raised.

You could even create a wrapper that simply takes an instance as an arg, and just defers all __getitem__() calls to that private member, while converting the key, for cases where you can't or don't want to subclass a type, and instead just want a utility wrapper for any sequence object.

Quick example of the latter suggestion:

class NoWrap(object):

    def __init__(self, obj, default=None):
        self._obj = obj 
        self._default = default

    def __getitem__(self, key):
        if isinstance(key, int):
            if key < 0:
                return self._default

        return self._obj.__getitem__(key)

In [12]: x = range(-10,10)
In [13]: x_wrapped = NoWrap(x)
In [14]: print x_wrapped[5]
In [15]: print x_wrapped[-1]
In [16]: x_wrapped = NoWrap(x, 'FOO')
In [17]: print x_wrapped[-1]
Saturday, July 31, 2021
answered 4 Months ago

Your understanding of the the array case is mostly correct. If an array is accessed sequentially, many processors will not only fetch the block containing the element, but will also prefetch subsequent blocks to minimize cycles spent waiting on cache misses. If you are using an Intel x86 processor, you can find details about this in the Intel x86 optimization manual. Also, if the array elements are small enough, loading a block containing an element means the next element is likely in the same block.

Unfortunately, for linked lists the pattern of loads is unpredictable from the processor's point of view. It doesn't know that when loading an element at address X that the next address is the contents of (X + 8).

As a concrete example, the sequence of load addresses for a sequential array access is nice and predictable. For example, 1000, 1016, 1032, 1064, etc.

For a linked list it will look like: 1000, 3048, 5040, 7888, etc. Very hard to predict the next address.

Thursday, September 9, 2021
answered 3 Months ago

Your image button is probably taking focus when you click on list item.

So Add this


to your root element


Defines the relationship between the ViewGroup and its descendants when looking for a View to take focus.

Must be one of the following constant values.

Constant    Value   Description
beforeDescendants   0    The ViewGroup will get focus before any of its descendants.
afterDescendants    1    The ViewGroup will get focus only if none of its descendants want it.
blocksDescendants   2    The ViewGroup will block its descendants from receiving focus.
This corresponds to the global attribute resource symbol descendantFocusability.
Friday, November 5, 2021
answered 4 Weeks ago
Only authorized users can answer the question. Please sign in first, or register a free account.
Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged :