• SpaceNoodle@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    122
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    8 months ago

    It’s a dynamically-sized list of objects of the same type stored contiguously in memory.

      • Fosheze@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        80
        ·
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        It’s a dynamically-sized list of objects of the same type stored contiguously in memory.

        dynamically-sized: The size of it can change as needed.

        list: It stores multiple things together.

        object: A bit of programmer defined data.

        of the same type: all the objects in the list are defined the same way

        stored contigiously in memory: if you think of memory as a bookshelf then all the objects on the list would be stored right next to each other on the bookshelf rather than spread across the bookshelf.

        • kbotc@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          15
          ·
          8 months ago

          Dynamically sized but stored contiguously makes the systems performance engineer in me weep. If the lists get big, the kernel is going to do so much churn.

          • Killing_Spark@feddit.de
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            15
            ·
            8 months ago

            Contiguous storage is very fast in terms of iteration though often offsetting the cost of allocation

          • :3 3: :3 3: :3 3: :3@lemmy.blahaj.zone
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            edit-2
            8 months ago

            Which is why you should:

            1. Preallocate the vector if you can guesstimate the size
            2. Use a vector library that won’t reallocate the entire vector on every single addition (like Rust, whose Vec doubles in size every time it runs out of space)

            Memory is fairly cheap. Allocation time not so much.

          • yetiftw@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            8 months ago

            matlab likes to pick the smallest available spot in memory to store a list, so for loops that increase the size of a matrix it’s recommended to preallocate the space using a matrix full of zeros!

      • KidnappedByKitties@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        8 months ago

        This is such an understated but useful description in this context. It’s also how I understood algebra for applied matrix computation.

        • Leate_Wonceslace@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          8 months ago

          I was just coming down from THC when I wrote this, so I’m extra jazzed you liked it. 😁

          Edit: also, love the username.

      • Gnome Kat@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        8 months ago

        Its the algebraic properties that are important, not all vectors are n-tuples, eg the set of polynomials of degree less than n.

        You need a basis to coordinate a vector, you can work with vectors without doing that and just deal with the algebraic properties. The coordinate representation is dependent on the basis chosen and isn’t fundamental to the vector. So calling them n-tuples isn’t technically correct.

        You can turn them into a set of coordinates if you have a basis, but the fact that you can do that is because of the algebraic properties so it’s those properties which define what a vector is.

        • Leate_Wonceslace@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          8 months ago

          I think a better example to show how vectors don’t necessarily need to be what people conceptualize as n-tuples would have been the real numbers. (Of course, these can be considered 1-tuples, but the same can be said of any arbitrary set element that is not itself a tuple with more entries.) A cooler example would have been R[x] (the ring of real-valued polynomials of a single variable) especially since an isomorphic ring using n-tuples would be a more cumbersome representation of the algebra.

      • unalivejoy@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        No. ArrayList is thread safe and implements the collections API. Vector doesn’t. Though if you’re using Java, there’s almost no instance where you would want to use a Vector instead of ArrayList.

            • DaPorkchop_@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              8 months ago

              Only if one thread modifies it while another one is iterating over it, if two threads try to modify the list at once there isn’t any kind of synchronization and it really could break your list.

              • unalivejoy@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                8 months ago

                For everything else, there’s Collections.synchronizedList(new ArrayList<>())