Data structures

Is it bad using linked lists where i could possibly use arrays?
Having a dynamic data structure is nice in case i decide i need
to remove / add more elements later, but in this case it's unlikely.

What is "good practice" in this case?

are you asking if ~doubling the memory usage when it is not necessary is a bad thing? then yes.

It's not about "good practice", it's about whether you need constant time access to arbitrary elements or not, whether you need the most space efficient storage possible or not, whether you need to traverse the list in both directions or not ...

>2 yeah, well i guess i'll rewrite it later if it becomes an issue. =/

Do you care a lot about program speed?
YES: Use arrays
NO: Use linked lists

As for good practices, inserting avocado kernels into yo'ur anus is considered part of the best practices for developers.

>>5
Is that what developers mean when they talk about ``inserting the kernel module''?

Read a fucking data structures book. This is so easy to be asked on /prog/.

Use vectors

>>1
Array:
Constant time access
Quite rigid without significant data structure backing.
Doing appending and splitting is generally horrible no matter how one looks at it.
Optimal to mutable techniques.
Data structure optimization techniques use this.

Linked list:
Worse case O(N) time access from beginning to end (if you're always going from beginning to end your algorithms may need refactoring)
Inherently flexible.
Doing appending and splitting is inherently easy and efficient.
Quite friendly to immutable techniques.
Data structure abstraction techniques use this, or its tree cousins.

>>5
That's not really correct you mental midget. Now shut up and go scrub another toilet.

I should probably split up further linked lists into mutable and immutable linked lists:

Mutable:
Appending and splitting is most efficient.

Immutable:
Appending and splitting is "half-bad" AFAIK.

>>11
Immutable:
Sharing is possible.

>>12
Wearing your moms pantyhose:
Boner is possible.

GC is nice

nice is GC

>>7
you complain about programm discussion on prog!!!! would you prefer the japanimation threads!!!! at least this is on topic!!!!
>>14
garbagde collection!!!! ha ha ha!!!! only nesecerry when you code gabadge in first place!!!!!!!!!!!

>>16
ha ha ha!!!!!

sdgfgsg