From: Volkan YAZICI
Subject: BK-Tree Implementation
Date: 
Message-ID: <a673fb2d-81a0-44fa-9596-fda4140690fa@y43g2000hsy.googlegroups.com>
Hi,

I have just uploaded a Common Lisp implementation of Burkhard-Keller
trees to its own homepage at http://cliki.net/bk-tree address. Code
comes with a Levenshtein distance metric of O(mn) complexity. But as
long as you supply a metric for your data type, tree is not restricted
to a certain type of data.

Code doesn't consist any compiler level optimizations. Just as-is
algorithm. But even in this form, it performs far better than brute
force.

Comments are welcome.


Regards.
From: Slobodan Blazeski
Subject: Re: BK-Tree Implementation
Date: 
Message-ID: <dd5fd834-7cce-46e0-9ea1-9953d54e2993@n20g2000hsh.googlegroups.com>
On Dec 1, 10:22 am, Volkan YAZICI <·············@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have just uploaded a Common Lisp implementation of Burkhard-Keller
> trees to its own homepage athttp://cliki.net/bk-treeaddress. Code
> comes with a Levenshtein distance metric of O(mn) complexity. But as
> long as you supply a metric for your data type, tree is not restricted
> to a certain type of data.
>
> Code doesn't consist any compiler level optimizations. Just as-is
> algorithm. But even in this form, it performs far better than brute
> force.
>
> Comments are welcome.
>
> Regards.
Good, but  have you considered adding it to cl-containers
http://common-lisp.net/project/cl-containers/ ?

Slobodan
From: Volkan YAZICI
Subject: Re: BK-Tree Implementation
Date: 
Message-ID: <71e8b051-53ba-4fd9-aa4b-7f62feb1b079@y43g2000hsy.googlegroups.com>
On Dec 1, 2:33 pm, Slobodan Blazeski <·················@gmail.com>
wrote:
> Good, but  have you considered adding it to cl-containers

Yes, I did. But cl-containers depends on

  metabang-dynamic-classes
  lift
  metatilities
  closer-mop
  metabang-bind
  moptilities

packages. At the moment, bk-tree doesn't depend on any other package
and I'm declined to introduce any unnecessary dependencies.


Regards.
comp.lang.lisp / 2007 / dec