- Programs on c++
- A Survey of an Adaptive Weighted Spatio-Temporal Pyramid Matching for Video Retrieval
- Data Structures And Algorithms - Alfred V. Aho
- PAS Trace Function 001
- Video Lecture for BCA
- p1
- (1)General Information
- IJSEA
- Lecture From Ideas to Ontologies, Examples
- Neeraj Voting
- Cpphtp4 PPT 07
- Data Structures and Algorithms - Alfred V. Aho
- 1 IntroToAutomataTheory.pdf
- Intro to Abstract Data Types
- software crisis
- Gl Key Tables
- Cpm & Pert Final
- Prolog project report
- Cost Optimization A
- bprintro
- Blue Eye
- Threads
- Readme
- ABC
- ServiceNow Specialist Blueprint
- position compilation
- Finding Similarities Between Structured Documents as a Crucial Stage for Generic Structured Document Classifier
- Finding Off Sets
- 125478
- EOQ Problems
- Foot Printing
- final nihongo paper uitm
- Bjp 4012008
- Syllabus 305

In computing, an abstract data type is a mathematical model for a certain class of data structures that have similar behavior; or for certain data types of one or more programming languages that have similar semantics. An abstract data type is defined indirectly, only by the operations that may be performed on it and by mathematical constraints on the effects (and possibly cost) of those operations . For example, an abstract stack data structure could be defined by two operations: push, that inserts some data item into the structure, and pop, that extracts an item from it; with the constraint that each pop always returns the most recently pushed item that has not been popped yet. When analyzing the efficiency of algorithms that use stacks, one may also specify that both operations take the same time no matter how many items have been pushed into the stack, and that the stack uses a constant amount of storage for each element. Abstract data types are purely theoretical entities, used (among other things) to simplify the description of abstract algorithms, to classify and evaluate data structures, and to formally describe the type systems of programming languages. However, an ADT may be implemented by specific data types ordata structures, in many ways and in many programming languages; or described in a formal specification language. ADTs are often implemented asmodules: the module's interface declares procedures that correspond to the ADT operations, sometimes with comments that describe the constraints. Thisinformation hiding strategy allows the implementation of the module to be changed without disturbing the client programs. The notion of abstract data types is related to the concept of data abstraction, important in objectoriented programming and design by contractmethodologies for software development

[1]

**Defining an abstract data type (ADT)
**

An Abstract Data type is defined as a mathematical model of the data objects that make up a data type as well as the functions that operate on these objects. There are no standard conventions for defining them. A broad division may be drawn between "imperative" and "functional" definition styles.

**Imperative abstract data type definitions
**

In the "imperative" view, which is closer to the philosophy of imperative programming languages, an abstract data structure is conceived as an entity that is mutable ² meaning that it may be in different states at different times. Some operations may change the state of the ADT; therefore, the order in which operations are evaluated is important, and the same operation on the same entities may have different effects if executed at different times ² just like the instructions of a computer, or the commands and procedures of an imperative language. To underscore this view, it is customary to

store(U.x). the operation that selects a field from a record variable R must yield a variableV that is aliased to that part of R. when extending the definition of abstract variable to include abstract records.x) where x is a value of unspecified nature.x) is often writtenV x (or some similar notation).x) }. An algorithm that does so is usually considered invalid.y). before performing any storeoperation on V. such restrictions may simplify the description and analysis of algorithms. the sequence { store(U. The imperative style is often used when describing abstract algorithms. it is implicitly assumed that storing a value into a variable Uhas no effect on the state of a distinct variable V. An abstract variable Vis a mutable entity that admits two operations: store(V. Thus. that yields a value. For example. with the constraint that fetch(V) always returns the value x used in the most recent store(V. The definition of an abstract variable V may also restrict the stored values x to members of a specific set X. there are some important algorithms whose efficiency strongly depends on the assumption that such afetch is legal. store(V. In this definition. for example. and fetch(V). Abstract variable Imperative ADT definitions often depend on the concept of an abstract variable. ADT definitions often assume that any operation that changes the state of one ADT instance has no effect on the state of any other instance (including other instances of the same ADT) ² unless the ADT axioms imply that the two instances are connected (aliased) in that sense. and fetch(V) is implied whenever a variableV is used in a context where a value is required. As in programming languages. because its effect is not defined. and improve their readability. rather than evaluated.say that the operations are executed or applied. which may be regarded as the simplest non-trivial ADT. More generally.x) operation on the same variable V. one could add the constraint that if U and V are distinct variables. (However. the operation store(V. called the range or type of V. Note that this definition does not imply anything about the result of evaluatingfetch(V) when V is uninitialized.y) } is equivalent to { store(V.fetch(V) + 1). To make this assumption explicit. V for store(V. that is. As in many programming languages. and returns some arbitrary value in the variable's range ) ] V + 1 is commonly understood to be a shorthand .

and invariants In imperative-style definitions. usually with axioms equivalent to the result of create() is distinct from any instance S in use by the algorithm. For any values x. This axiom may be strengthened to exclude also partial aliasing with other instances. . one usually includes in the ADT definition a create() operation that yields an instance of the ADT. and invariants. including other stacks. an imperative definition of an abstract stack could specify that the state of a stack S can be modified only by the operations push(S . it follows.x) }.y). that relate the states of the ADT before and after the exceution of each operation. cannot change the state of S.y. V.y. and z are any values.x). push(S. and pop(S). } where x. the sequence {push(S. the axioms are often expressed bypreconditions. that is. postconditions. or new stacks). by definition.x). x }.x).y).x). for example. and U. that the sequence { push(S. push(S. this axiom still allows implementations ofcreate() to yield a previously created instance that has become inaccessible to the program. W pop(S). On the other hand.y) } is equivalent to { push(T. V z. U pop(S). this condition implies that pop(S) pop(S) } restores S to the state it had before the { push(S. V } is equivalent to { V Since the assignment { V {V x }.z). with the constraint that For any value x and any abstract variable V. and any distinct stacks S and T. To describe such algorithms. W x} Here it is implicitly assumed that operations on a stack instance do not modify the state of any other ADT instance. push(T. W are pairwise distinct variables. the sequence of operations {push(S. V pop(S).postconditions.x) }. Example: abstract stack (imperative) As another example. that specify properties of the ADT that are notchanged by the operations. that yields a value as a result. Preconditions. From this condition and from the properties of abstract variables. where x is some value of unspecified nature. is equivalent to {U y. that specify when an operation may be executed. push(S.Instance creation Some algorithms need to create new instances of some ADT (such as new variables.

is to consider each state of the structure as a separate entity. top: takes a stack state. that operate on "the" only existing stack. consider augmenting the definition of the stack ADT with an operation compare(S. Example: abstract stack (functional) For example. any operation that modifies the ADT is modeled as a mathematical function that takes the old state as an argument. there is no way (or need) to define an "abstract variable" with the semantics of imperative variables (namely. some ADTs cannot be meaningfully defined without assuming multiple instances. which is not explicitly notated. For example. and all operations were applied to that instance. In this view. these functions have no side effects. In the functional view. the abstract stack above could have been defined with operations push(x) and pop(). closer to the spirit of functional programming.x)) (pushing something into a stack makes it non-empty) Single-instance style Sometimes an ADT is defined as if only one instance of it existed during the execution of the algorithm. For an example. Functional ADT definitions Another way to define an ADT. one passes them as arguments to functions.A stack ADT definition usually includes also a Boolean-valued functionempty(S) and a create() operation that returns a stack instance. Instead of storing values into variables. with axioms equivalent to create() S for any stack S (a newly created stack is distinct from all previous stacks) empty(create()) (a newly created stack is empty) not empty(push(S.T) that checks whether the stacks S and T contain the same items in the same order. and returns the new state as part of the result. . a complete functional-style definition of a stack ADT could use the three operations: push: takes a stack state and an arbitrary value. This is the case when a single operation takes two distinct instances of the ADT as parameters. and the same operation applied to the same arguments (including the same input states) will always return the same results (and output states). returns a stack state. ADT definitions in this style can be easily rewritten to admit multiple coexisting instances of the ADT. by adding an explicit instance parameter (like S in the previous example) to every operation that uses or modifies the implicit instance. Therefore. returns a value. the order in which they are evaluated is immaterial. Unlike the "imperative" operations. pop: takes a stack state. in particular. withfetch and store operations). On the other hand. returns a stack state.

As in some other branches of mathematics. since one cannot obtain such stack states with the given operations. those two operations are undefined (hence invalid) when s = . hash(s). This view actually mirrors the behavior of some concrete implementations. However. On the other hand. that tests whether two structures are equivalent in some sense. one can test whether a stack is empty by testing whether it is equal to .x) = s for some x. such as linked lists with hash cons. that becomes the empty stack ( ) after a finite number of pops. a functional definition of a stack ADT may assume the existence of a special stack state. that computes some standard hash function from the instance's state. In the stack ADT example above. the empty stack. Typical operations Some operations that are often specified for ADTs (possibly under other names) are compare(s. and two stack states that contain the same values in the same order are considered to be identical states.x)) = s (pop undoes the effect of push) In a functional-style definition there is no need for a create operation. it is customary to assume also that the stack states are only those whose existence can be proved from the axioms in a finite number of steps. unless s is a stack state returned by a push. Instead of create().t).y) if and only if x = y and s = t. that produces a human-readable representation of the structure's state. each time yielding a different state) or circular stacks (that return to the same state after a finite number of pops).x)) = x (pushing an item onto a stack leaves it at the top) pop(push(s.x) =push(t. . Note that these axioms do not define the effect of top(s) or pop(s). The stack states can be thought of as being potential states of a single stack structure. the axioms above do not exclude the existence of infinite stacks (that can be poped forever. the axioms (and the lack of side effects) imply that push(s. print(s) or show(s). Note that the axioms imply that push( . In particular. designated by a special symbol like or "()". By themselves.with the following axioms: top(push(s. they are assumed "not to exist". there is no notion of "stack instance". they do not exclude states s such that pop(s) = s or push(s.x) In a functional definition of a stack one does not need an empty predicate: instead. this rule means that every stack is a finite sequence of values. Since push leaves the stack non-empty. or define a bottom() operation that takes no aguments and returns this special stack state. Indeed.

clone(t). or resets it to some "initial state". . The ADT instances are represented by some concrete data structure that is manipulated by those procedures. In that case one needs additional axioms that specify how much memory each ADT instance uses. which have proved useful in a great variety of applications. copy(s. For example.t). Implementation Implementing an ADT means providing one procedure or function for each abstract operation. are Container Deque List Map Multimap Multiset Priority queue Queue Set Stack String Tree Each of these ADTs may be defined in many ways and variants. and returns s. that puts instance s in a state equivalent to that of t. a stack ADT may or may not have acount operation that tells how many items have been pushed and not yet popped. as a function of its state. it may be necessary when one needs to analyze the storage used by an algorithm that uses the ADT. that yields a new instance of the ADT. The free operation is not normally relevant or meaningful.In imperative-style ADT definitions. one often finds also create(). This choice makes a difference not only for its clients but also for the implementation. free(s) or destroy(s). not necessarily equivalent. that reclaims the memory and other resources used by s. However. initialize(s). since ADTs are theoretical entities that do not "use memory". according to the ADT's specifications.t). that prepares a newly-created instance s for further operations. that performs s new(). copy(s. Examples Some common ADTs. and how much of it is returned to the pool by free.

The implementation of the module ² namely. support a form of abstract data types. Example: implementation of the stack ADT As an example. In this model an ADT is typically implemented as class. stack_Item e). Thus. types refer to behaviors not representations. the bodies of the procedures and the concrete data structure used ² can then be hidden from most clients of the module.[3] Modern object-oriented languages. In a pure object-oriented program that uses interfaces as types. */ void stack_push(stack_T s. However. instance. */ /* Create new stack /* Add an item at the /* Remove the top item /* Check whether stack . */ int stack_empty(stack_T ts). it is a abstract type that refers to a hidden representation. Imperative-style interface An imperative-style interface might be: typedef struct stack_Rep stack_Rep. It also can undermine the extensibility of objectoriented programs. for example. whose interface contains only the signature (number and types of the parameters and results) of the operations. An ADT implementation is often packaged as one or more modules. and most of the other ADT operations as methods of that class. such an approach does not easily encapsulate multiple representational variants found in an ADT. This makes it possible to change the implementation without affecting the clients. The module's interface typically declares the constructors as ordinary procedures. an abstract stack can be implemented by a linked list or by an array. When a class is used as a type. from the stack and return it . using several different concrete data structures. /* Type: instance representation (an opaque record). each instance (in imperative-style definitions) or each state (in functional-style definitions) is usually represented by a handle of some sort. here is an implementation of the stack ADT above in the C programming language. /* Type: value that can be stored in stack (arbitrary address). When implementing an ADT. */ typedef void *stack_Item.Usually there are many ways to implement the same ADT. is empty. initially empty. top of the stack. */ typedef stack_Rep *stack_T. and each instance of the ADT is an object of that class. */ stack_T stack_create(void). */ stack_Item stack_pop(stack_T s). such as C++ and Java. /* Type: handle to a stack instance (an opaque pointer).

In practice the formal definition should specify that the space is proportional to the number of items pushed and not yet popped. */ if (stack_empty(t)) { « } « /* Include the stack interface. the implementation could use a linked list. from the stack.such as C++ and Java. t = stack_push(t. */ This interface can be implemented in many ways. . /* Adds x at the top of s. nor how long each operation should take. since the formal definition of the ADT. */ /* Create a stack instance. int foo = 17. stack state (an opaque pointer). */ /* An arbitrary datum.This implementation could be used in the following manner: #include <stack. returns the resulting state. (arbitrary address). */ ADT libraries Many modern programming languages. /* Returns the empty stack state. */ stack_Item stack_top(stack_T s). */ stack_T stack_pop(stack_T s). the stack. above. It also does not specify whether the stack state t continues to exist after a call s pop(t). come with standard libraries that implement several common ADTs. To comply with these additional specifications. For example: typedef struct stack_Rep stack_Rep. */ /* Push the address of 'foo' onto /* Get the top item and delete it /* Do something if stack is empty. stack_Item x). /* Returns the item currently at the top of s. such as those listed above. &foo). */ « void *e = stack_pop(t). or an array (with dynamic resizing) together with two integers (an item count and the array size) Functional-style interface Functional-style ADT definitions are more appropriate for functional programming languages. The implementation may be arbitrarily inefficient. independently of that number. */ typedef stack_Rep *stack_T.h> stack_T t = stack_create(). does not specify how much space the stack may use. However. and that every one of the operations above must finish in a constant amount of time. */ stack_T stack_push(stack_T s. */ /* Type: stack state /* Type: handle to a /* Type: item stack_T stack_empty(void). /* Remove the top item from s. */ typedef void *stack_Item. one can provide a functional style interface even in an imperative language like C. and vice-versa. returns the resulting state. representation (an opaque record).

which can be regarded as an implementation of the Map or Table ADT.Built-in abstract data types The specification of some programming languages is intentionally vague about the representation of certain built-in data types. and Perl. Therefore. Examples are the arrays in many scripting languages. such as Awk. those types can be viewed as "built-in ADTs". .Lua. defining only the operations that can be done on them.

- Programs on c++Uploaded bykshitij
- A Survey of an Adaptive Weighted Spatio-Temporal Pyramid Matching for Video RetrievalUploaded byseventhsensegroup
- Data Structures And Algorithms - Alfred V. AhoUploaded byapi-19825490
- PAS Trace Function 001Uploaded byJuan Choque Santos
- Video Lecture for BCAUploaded byedholecom
- p1Uploaded bymaycon lsdfj
- (1)General InformationUploaded byHugo Cipriani
- IJSEAUploaded byijsea
- Lecture From Ideas to Ontologies, ExamplesUploaded byDanieleFrancescoSantamaria
- Neeraj VotingUploaded byaarun_84
- Cpphtp4 PPT 07Uploaded byMuhammad Rana Farhan
- Data Structures and Algorithms - Alfred V. AhoUploaded byapi-3777165
- 1 IntroToAutomataTheory.pdfUploaded byBüşra Çelik
- Intro to Abstract Data TypesUploaded byMunna Pehlwan
- software crisisUploaded byMesfin Abate
- Gl Key TablesUploaded byPratul Chourasia
- Cpm & Pert FinalUploaded bySitam Suvam
- Prolog project reportUploaded byRatan Sunder Parai
- Cost Optimization AUploaded byocmain
- bprintroUploaded byHarish Gaddam
- Blue EyeUploaded byapi-3760105
- ThreadsUploaded byAnand Viswanathan
- ReadmeUploaded byAlessio Trianni
- ABCUploaded byJerome Russel Publìcò
- ServiceNow Specialist BlueprintUploaded byjojo
- position compilationUploaded byapi-337578683
- Finding Similarities Between Structured Documents as a Crucial Stage for Generic Structured Document ClassifierUploaded byAlexander Decker
- Finding Off SetsUploaded byWeeMan1337
- 125478Uploaded bykapenzia
- EOQ ProblemsUploaded bytomtomtom777