Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!cs.utexas.edu!csd4.milw.wisc.edu!bbn!usc!randvax!leverich
From: leverich@randvax.UUCP (Brian Leverich)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp
Subject: Re: long and deep?
Message-ID: <2075@randvax.UUCP>
Date: 11 Jun 89 12:55:50 GMT
References: <47400023@uicsrd.csrd.uiuc.edu>
Reply-To: leverich@rand-unix.UUCP (Brian Leverich)
Organization: RAND Corp., Santa Monica, CA
Lines: 22

In article <47400023@uicsrd.csrd.uiuc.edu> kwang@uicsrd.csrd.uiuc.edu writes:
>
>	1.  How long, do you think, become the lists? (1 2 3 4 ....)
>	    How deep, do you think, become the lists? (((((....)))))
>	2.  Were there frequent cases, you think, lists becomes both
>	    long and deep? or ...
>
For the knowledge-based simulation work we're doing, we typically have
thousands to tens of thousands of object attributes that are short shallow
lists.  Then we have hundreds to thousands of attributes specifically
containing fact collections or event queues, with these guys being a few
hundred or more top-level elements and nesting typically no more than
three layers deep.

Incidentally, very few of our structures have pointers into their
interiors.  KBSim would be a ripe field for the design of tuned garbage
collectors...  Cheers.  -B
-- 
  "Simulate it in ROSS"
  Brian Leverich                       | U.S. Snail: 1700 Main St.
  ARPAnet:     leverich@rand-unix      |             Santa Monica, CA 90406
  UUCP/usenet: decvax!randvax!leverich | Ma Bell:    (213) 393-0411 X7769