How Judy arrays work and why they are so fast (2002)

This illustrates perfectly the premature optimization paradox, unless having huge datasets and the need to scale towards huge numbers it won't be much worth and still hashing maps are going to outperform Judy in certain use cases. Having clarity of code and being able to patch a critical bug is also a priceless competitive advantage, and to be honest, diving into a 20k line codebase related to algorithmic intensive code just is nothing to be underestimated... I wonder if someone uses Judy in production and if they made also some measurements.

From the summary:

> If your data is strictly sequential; you should use a regular array. If your data is often sequential, or approximately sequential (e.g. an arithmetic sequence stepping by 64), Judy might be the best data structure to use. If you need to keep space to a minimum--you have a huge number of associative arrays, or you're only storing very small values, Judy is probably a good idea. If you need an sorted iterator, go with Judy. Otherwise, a hash table may be just as effective, possibly faster, and much simpler.

C doesn't have a flat memory model, other than within objects. ISO C doesn't even define the behavior of comparing two pointers to distinct objects for inequality, as in p0 < p1. Only exact equality: p0 == p1.