Talk:List of data structures

This article is rated List-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Computer science High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computer science, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Computer science related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Computer scienceWikipedia:WikiProject Computer scienceTemplate:WikiProject Computer scienceComputer science High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Things you can help WikiProject Computer science with: Here are some tasks awaiting attention: Article requests : Requested articles/Applied arts and sciences/Computer science, computing, and Internet Cleanup : Computer science articles needing attention Computer science articles needing expert attention Copyedit : Computing Expand : Computer science Infobox : Computer science articles without infoboxes Maintain : Timeline of computing 2020–present Photo : Find pictures for the biographies of computer scientists (see List of computer scientists) Computing articles needing images Stubs : Computer science stubs Unreferenced : WikiProject Computer science/Unreferenced BLPs Project-related : Tag all relevant articles in Category:Computer science and sub-categories with {{WikiProject Computer science}} Lists This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lists, an attempt to structure and organize all list pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.ListsWikipedia:WikiProject ListsTemplate:WikiProject ListsList ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

1. Bitmaps

   * Images
   * Heightfields

WHY? Shouldn't it be bit array??? Visame (talk) 16:47, 20 August 2008 (UTC)Reply

---

I was wondering if this page could be extended to become a more comprehensive listing of data structures. The idea would be to create a standard format of the form

Name

Operations

Efficiency

lower bounds

refs

cross refs to other structures etc.

---

That may not be appropriate for the list page, but each page could have a table, like most language, country, and taxonomic classification pages have, that has a standard format with common information. --G Gordon Worley III 22:50, 23 Sep 2004 (UTC)

---

An associative array is a Abstract Data Type, not a Data Structure. Should it be on here?

---

Shouldn't BSP trees get their own link? It has it's own article already..

The way this page is currently layed out is inconsistent and rather confusing. Many of the data structures listed could fit easily in more than one place. For example, heaps are a type of priority queue, and binary search trees are a type of associative array. I suggest this page be reorganized so that the top-level heading are abstract data types and underneath are all of the concrete data structures that implement the abstract data type. A "Miscellaneous" top-level category would house any unique concrete data structures. Thoughts?

Does that mean that an entry may occur under more than one abstract data type? -Pgan002 (talk) 03:49, 4 March 2011 (UTC)Reply

I would like to see in this page, data structures in a table with columns saying which advantages they have: For instance, some data structures are useful when data is sparse, while some other behave better when they are complete. Some of them behave very well on parallel environments while some others do better on single threaded. Some others provide very good space usage, while some others give a very good performance while not caring about the space too much. Some have very fast queries while slow updates.

That would make a page like a reference where to find which data structure is suitable for each problem depending on the properties we want.

Just some thoughts.

That would be great, plus time bounds on find, insert and delete operations on each structure. -Pgan002 (talk) 03:50, 4 March 2011 (UTC)Reply

Good idea! But some families of data structures are functionally different, while others differ only in their performance characteristics. We might group them accordingly into tables. For example, all arrays and lists could go into a table with the following columns:

Time complexity of...

• Random access
• Sequential access
• Random insertion
• Sequential insertion
• Random deletion
• Sequential deletion

Is string really a primitive type? it is composed of an array of another primitive thus falling into a different class? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.97.20.167 (talk) 17:48, 14 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

I guess a lot changed since this question was asked - string is no longer listed as a primitive.

That is, however, wrong: in some languages, such as PHP and JS, a string is considered a primitive (both languages lack a primitive that represents a single character).

This logic can be considered in the same way that an int64/bigint is made up of 2x int32/int, each of which is made up of 2x int16/smallint, which in turn is made up of.....and finally, which is made up of one bit/bool.

That said, I believe that the problem with this article is that it assumes some types are universally (non-)primitive, when clearly that depends on the programming language. I would rather have a short section that explains the difference between primitive/non-primitive/composite (with some examples) and the a plain ol' list of all types. Uuf6429 (talk) 23:36, 8 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

Are tables are really useful here? I think plain list with some more subsections would be better here. Andreas Kaufmann (talk) 08:15, 18 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

Date, or DateTime, should be mentioned, perhaps in a new section that includes String, as perhaps a "possibly primitive (depending upon the programing language)" type.

However I know part of the reason why it is not yet included is that there doesn't seem to be an article for Date (datatype), DateTime (datatype) or similar. Mark Hurd (talk) 04:43, 18 March 2012 (UTC)Reply

In which languages is it a primitive type? I think normally it would be just a record/object, not a primitive type built into the language. -- X7q (talk) 06:38, 18 March 2012 (UTC)Reply

It is effectively (although not quite completely) a primitive of .NET Framework-based languages. And VB6 hid the fact that it was effectively a Double. Mark Hurd (talk) 13:50, 18 March 2012 (UTC)Reply

It is also a primitive type of any SQL dialect. Fabian Pijcke (talk) 05:48, 7 August 2017 (UTC)Reply

I suggest that "Data structures" redirect here and not to "Data structure" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.139.71.50 (talk) 06:50, 3 June 2012 (UTC)Reply

Huh? How is trees a type of trees? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.183.23.147 (talk) 02:06, 17 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

Why is the line even there?

A "node compares" to what? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.183.23.147 (talk) 01:59, 17 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

14.139.240.50 (talk) converted this from "Tries". I have reverted. Mark Hurd (talk) 07:19, 14 May 2014 (UTC)Reply

hello

I don't know why the data types, and the primitive data type are listed on a list that is called "list of data structures".

won't it be clear if there were and introduction explaining why they are included in this list?

I can't understand why "data types" and "primitive data types", that are not related to "data structures" in their definition, are listed as data structures.

see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primitive_data_type https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data_type

I can't give sugestions because I don't understand much of this. thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Elcarlis54 (talk • contribs) 16:09, 3 January 2017 (UTC)Reply

Records are discussed but I would have thought that tables warrant a mention too? A simple table implementation would be a list of (pointers to) records. Alternatively, if tables do not fall under the rubric of data structures, then this should be pointed out somewhere in the article with reasons. HTH. RobbieIanMorrison (talk) 14:56, 23 November 2018 (UTC)Reply

Hello,

I am confused why "Trie" is not under the "Tree" category?

Because in the Trie it is said that:

In computer science, a trie, also called digital tree or prefix tree, is a type of search tree, a tree data structure used for locating specific keys from within a set.

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nurgasemetey (talk • contribs) 20:40, 10 July 2021 (UTC)Reply

Note to any other readers: it looks like this was (at some point) fixed. Caleb Stanford (talk) 17:00, 11 March 2022 (UTC)Reply

Why is the Python 3 standard type hierarchy depicted at the top of this page? The page has very little to do with Python's classification of data types. Caleb Stanford (talk) 16:58, 11 March 2022 (UTC)Reply

removed per WP:BOLD, further discussion welcome! Caleb Stanford (talk) 16:59, 11 March 2022 (UTC)Reply

The list is definitely ordered. why would this be dubious? Jasdasra (talk) 00:13, 9 June 2022 (UTC)Reply

I came here looking for the answer to this question, as I'm fairly certain that this is NOT dubious. 2001:67C:10EC:574F:8000:0:0:36 (talk) 16:26, 13 September 2022 (UTC)Reply

Due to the ambiguity between informal and formal definitions, having an inclusive list of structures and types would make more sense. Jasdasra (talk) 00:43, 9 June 2022 (UTC)Reply

Quoting the article:

> This order is usually determined by the order in which the elements are added to the structure

In PHP, that applies to associative arrays as well. In fact, in PHP, lists are plain associative arrays with an unmanaged/auto-incrementing index. Uuf6429 (talk) 23:49, 8 February 2024 (UTC)Reply