On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 9:57 PM, Yann Ylavic <[email protected]> wrote: > On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 9:38 PM, Jim Jagielski <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> On Jul 11, 2014, at 12:29 PM, Yann Ylavic <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>>> >>>> Maybe we could also leave skiplist as is and introduce a new type >>>> (skipmap?) that would be ordered and that would take both key and >>>> value as arguments (in the relevant functions)... >>> >> >> Yeah... good idea. > > OK, will propose that. > > I'll commit skiplist's size computation bugfix included in the current > patch, and maybe the stack reuse (to avoid malloc()s for each > insert()).
And the tests. > > Regarding apr_skiplist_destroy(), don't you think we should free() the > given pointer when the skiplist was malloc()ated, and have > apr_skiplist_clear() which does not? > > Last but not least, apr_skiplist_remove() to remove one (as is) or all > the matching elements?
