7 months, 3 weeks

• Arrays provide O(1)-time access to an element based on an integer index. The ability to access the kth element for any k in O(1) time is a hallmark advantage of arrays . In contrast, locating the kth element in a linked list requires O(k) time to traverse the list from the beginning, or possibly O(n− k) time, if traversing backward from the end of a doubly linked list.

• Operations with equivalent asymptotic bounds typically run a constant factor more efficiently with an array-based structure versus a linked structure. As an example, consider the typical enqueue operation for a queue. Ignoring the issue of resizing an array, this operation for the ArrayQueue class  involves an arithmetic calculation of the new index, an increment of an integer, and storing a reference to the element in the array.
In contrast, the process for a LinkedQueue  requires the instantiation of a node, appropriate linking of nodes, and an increment of an integer. While this operation completes in O(1) time in either model, the actual number of CPU operations will be more in the linked version, especially given the instantiation of the new node.

• Array-based representations typically use proportionally less memory than linked structures. This advantage may seem counterintuitive, especially given that the length of a dynamic array may be longer than the number of elements that it stores. Both array-based lists and linked lists are referential structures, so the primary memory for storing the actual objects that are elements is the same for either structure. What differs is the auxiliary amounts of memory that are used by the two structures. For an array-based container of n elements, a typical worst case may be that a recently resized dynamic array has allocated memory for 2n object references. With linked lists, memory must be devoted not only to store a reference to each contained object, but also explicit references that link the nodes. So a singly linked list of length n already requires 2n references (an element reference and next reference for each node). With a doubly linked list, there are 3n references.

• Link-based structures provide worst-case time bounds for their operations. This is in contrast to the amortized bounds associated with the expansion or contraction of a dynamic array. When many individual operations are part of a larger computation, and we only care about the total time of that computation, an amortized bound is as good as a worst-case bound precisely because it gives a guarantee on the sum of the time spent on the individual operations.
However, if data structure operations are used in a real-time system that is designed to provide more immediate responses (e.g., an operating system, Web server, air traffic control system), a long delay caused by a single (amortized) operation may have an adverse effect.

• Link-based structures support O(1)-time insertions and deletions at arbitrary positions. The ability to perform a constant-time insertion or deletion with the PositionalList class, by using a Position to efficiently describe the location of the operation, is perhaps the most significant advantage of the linked list. This is in stark contrast to an array-based sequence. Ignoring the issue of resizing an array, inserting or deleting an element from the end of an array-based list can be done in constant time. However, more general insertions and deletions are expensive. For example, with Python’s array-based list class, a call to insert or pop with index k uses O(n−k+1) time because of the loop to shift all subsequent elements. As an example application, consider a text editor that maintains a document as a sequence of characters. Although users often add characters to the end of the document, it is also possible to use the cursor to insert or delete one or more characters at an arbitrary position within the document. If the character sequence were stored in an array-based sequence (such as a Python list), each such edit operation may require linearly many characters to be shifted, leading to O(n) performance for each edit operation. With a linked-list representation, an arbitrary edit operation (insertion or deletion of a character at the cursor) can be performed in O(1) worst-case time, assuming we are given a position that represents the location of the cursor.

See all(3)

Tags

Topics
Related