a.(b,c) -> a.(c,b) : a,b,c all nested block
and it has to do a special, the append. Append is not a natural act, every append or delete alters the length of the array of nodes, and that requires a special arrangement between the bots, a verification about when and where.
But, all appends happen at the array end, and are 'covered' by the root:
a.x -> a.(x,new) and new is generally a graph of rank one. But, other than the root node, every node is covered, and it covering is to the left. The amateur that I am, I can tell you that the bot graph managers or going to do a lot of local bubble sort, and it will look like some guy with a heavy graph in each arm, he is standing at the node of some lattice, trying to pull the one up, let the other down and get a switch. It does this because in the adaptive window, some prior quantization allocate too much rap for the
So, loal switching between two peer blocks is simple, basically done. We might get away with combinations (nightmarish maybe) but sequences of local exchanges. This is another big deal for both security and efficiency, it is really mathematically required to make this mostly a responsive local bubble sort. So, I move on. Gonna pull out the Huffman literature, see what's new,and get the standard algorithm going for test Gotta see how efficient it is with nested block.
No comments:
Post a Comment