[LAD] RDF libraries, was Re: [ANN] IR: LV2 Convolution Reverb

[Olivier Guilyardi]

On 03/24/2011 07:49 AM, Stefano D'Angelo wrote:
> Hi Olivier,
> 
> 2011/3/19 Olivier Guilyardi <list at samalyse.com>:
>> On 03/18/2011 06:06 PM, Olivier Guilyardi wrote:
>>> Hi!
>>>
>>> On 03/11/2011 07:22 PM, David Robillard wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Fri, 2011-03-11 at 12:08 +0100, Olivier Guilyardi wrote:
>>>>> I will try and submit a patch to remove glib. It'll take some time because I
>>>>> have dozens of other things to do, but I will work on this. I had a quick look
>>>>> at sord, it seems it only needs glib's sequence and hash table. Is this correct,
>>>>> or will you need some more utilities?
>>>> Overall I need sequence, hash table (or hash table like thing, I'll
>>>> probably use a radix tree)
>>> Alright, attached is a minimal radix tree implementation. I just wrote it from
>>> scratch. Would that work for sord?
>>>
>>> If so, I'll try and benchmark it and do some more tests.
>> Attached is an updated version with a couple of fixes and optimizations.
> 
> I see nobody answered yet... but don't despair, it's probably because
> the long-awaited LV2r4 release made David want to run away for a
> while. :-)
> 
> However, I have no idea why he needs such a thing and I have to admit
> my ignorance in this regard (the only thing I ever read about radix
> trees is the Wikipedia article, I'm afraid).

Yes, same thing here, the wikipedia article ;) But it was rather fun to write.
There are quite a few things to improve, and I've realized that the remove()
function is broken. It's pretty experimental, but my first benchmarks are quite
good. I'll try and work some more on it soon.

I think that in the context of RDF, David expects many keys to share common
(sub)prefixes, and so the radix tree may be the more appropriate for speed, when
compared to a standard hash table.

With LV2, RDF is pretty small so it's really not a big deal IMO.. But sord could
also be used out of LV2 I guess, for some other RDF needs.

--
  Olivier