Use prog12.2a and prog12.2b to compare the theoretical results for hashing with linear probing against experimental results (1/2)(1-1/(1-\alpha)) probes for search hits (1/2)(1-1/(1-\alpha)^2) probes for search misses Knuth's hash function matches the theoretical results better Dynamic version...? prog12.2d works, and very suspiciously gives exact same results as prog12.2b... ============================================================ yoshi@renyi ~/Documents/www/2013i/mac323/exx/2013.06.06b $ prog12.2b < bible_KJ.txt > bb_s.out yoshi@renyi ~/Documents/www/2013i/mac323/exx/2013.06.06b $ prog12.2b < bible_KJ.txt > bb_s.out yoshi@renyi ~/Documents/www/2013i/mac323/exx/2013.06.06b $ prog12.2b < jean.txt > jb_s.out yoshi@renyi ~/Documents/www/2013i/mac323/exx/2013.06.06b $ prog12.2b < manifesto.txt > mb_s.out yoshi@renyi ~/Documents/www/2013i/mac323/exx/2013.06.06b $ tail bb_s.out Statistics: 824150 keys. Statistics: 34059 distinct keys. Final table load factor: 0.259852 Total number of probes: 40065 Average number of probes per miss: 1.41402 Average number of probes per hit: 1.17634 yoshi@renyi ~/Documents/www/2013i/mac323/exx/2013.06.06b $ tail jb_s.out Statistics: 568535 keys. Statistics: 53661 distinct keys. Final table load factor: 0.409404 Total number of probes: 72307 Average number of probes per miss: 1.92792 Average number of probes per hit: 1.34748 yoshi@renyi ~/Documents/www/2013i/mac323/exx/2013.06.06b $ tail mb_s.out Statistics: 14471 keys. Statistics: 3740 distinct keys. Final table load factor: 0.0285342 Total number of probes: 3804 Average number of probes per miss: 1.02996 Average number of probes per hit: 1.01711 yoshi@renyi ~/Documents/www/2013i/mac323/exx/2013.06.06b $