rax

erator. and so forth. Basically a decent implementation of hash tables end being slower and more complex to handle than a good radix tree implementation (not to implement, radix trees when full featured are a nightmare to get right, if you have a stateful iterator). So once you implement a good radix tree (check for instance the "rax.c" file inside Redis source code, or simply https://github.com/antirez/rax), you start to see that, hey! you have all the advantages of an hash table, but it's faster, the key space is sorted, you can iterate it in many ways, and the memory usage is much smaller. So I'm not sure at this point, other than "the simplest dictionary data structure I can implement just recalling from memory", if there are great applications for in-memory hash tables as data structures. They are perhaps starting to be more interesting for disk applications. For all my new projects I imagine myself just copying rax.[ch] and use it, unless there is some very odd reason why an hash table will be preferable.