-
Couldn't load subscription status.
- Fork 34
chore: Add computational complexity to doc comments of BTreeSet functions #293
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Conversation
Co-authored-by: Dimitris Sarlis <dimitrios.sarlis@dfinity.org>
This reverts commit 62a7e5b.
…to add_new_functions_to_b_tree_set
…stable-structures into add_new_functions_to_b_tree_set
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Should all of these say that n is the number of elements in the set or is it too obvious? (I mean in the case of a single set involved, of course with 2 sets we had to be clear what's n and m).
…stable-structures into improve_doc_comments_b_tree_set
|
@dsarlis I think the best way to go is to explain what 'n' and/or 'm' are in each instance. I just updated doc comments accordingly. |
This PR introduces computational complexity to the doc comments of BTreeSet functions.