Am 24.01.2017 um 00:54 schrieb Jeff King:
The speed looks like a reasonable outcome. I'm torn on the qsort_r() demo patch. I don't think it looks too bad. OTOH, I don't think I would want to deal with the opposite-argument-order versions.
The code itself may look OK, but it's not really necessary and the special implementation for Linux makes increases maintenance costs. Can we save it for later and first give the common implemention a chance to prove itself?
Is there any interest in people adding the ISO qsort_s() to their libc implementations? It seems like it's been a fair number of years by now.
https://sourceware.org/ml/libc-alpha/2014-12/msg00513.html is the last post mentioning qsort_s on the glibc mailing list, but it didn't even make it into https://sourceware.org/glibc/wiki/Development_Todo/Master. Not sure what's planned in BSD land, didn't find anything (but didn't look too hard).
René
