![]() | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
It says, "[...] is not reversible in general without additional information". As I see it, a K-ary Tree and a LC-RS Tree are just different representations of the same high-level data structure (like a directory structure). The tree in the example image is reversible (just think of the right one as being rotated 45 degrees clockwise) and going back and forth between a linked list and a subtree is trivial.
There is a small discrepancy that in a K-ary Tree the number of children is limited to K and in a LC-RS Tree there is no such limit. Only when a tree is converted to LC-RS, mutated, and attempted to convert back to K-ary, there is a chance that K needs to grow, which makes them incompatible. But if you think of it as converting from and back to a generic tree (as if K is infinite or variable), they're completely interchangeable. -- Zom-B ( talk) 21:14, 14 December 2012 (UTC)
A couple of other readers also found this confusing. Suggest moving the explanation from talk section to main article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.16.140.25 ( talk) 16:40, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
Here's a quote of some of the page's source:
[...] For example, we have a binary tree below: ''1 /|\ / | \ / | \ 2 3 4 / \ | 5 6 7 / \ 8 9'' [...]
I think that's an error. I don't think that figure depicts a binary tree. 164.119.6.190 ( talk) 22:40, 3 January 2017 (UTC)
«The LCRS representation is more space-efficient than a traditional multiway tree» ¿what would be a traditional multiway tree representation?
![]() | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
It says, "[...] is not reversible in general without additional information". As I see it, a K-ary Tree and a LC-RS Tree are just different representations of the same high-level data structure (like a directory structure). The tree in the example image is reversible (just think of the right one as being rotated 45 degrees clockwise) and going back and forth between a linked list and a subtree is trivial.
There is a small discrepancy that in a K-ary Tree the number of children is limited to K and in a LC-RS Tree there is no such limit. Only when a tree is converted to LC-RS, mutated, and attempted to convert back to K-ary, there is a chance that K needs to grow, which makes them incompatible. But if you think of it as converting from and back to a generic tree (as if K is infinite or variable), they're completely interchangeable. -- Zom-B ( talk) 21:14, 14 December 2012 (UTC)
A couple of other readers also found this confusing. Suggest moving the explanation from talk section to main article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.16.140.25 ( talk) 16:40, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
Here's a quote of some of the page's source:
[...] For example, we have a binary tree below: ''1 /|\ / | \ / | \ 2 3 4 / \ | 5 6 7 / \ 8 9'' [...]
I think that's an error. I don't think that figure depicts a binary tree. 164.119.6.190 ( talk) 22:40, 3 January 2017 (UTC)
«The LCRS representation is more space-efficient than a traditional multiway tree» ¿what would be a traditional multiway tree representation?