In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Sun, 6 Apr 2003 12:36:11 +0200, Nils Larsch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
nlarsch> Richard Levitte wrote: nlarsch> ... nlarsch> > +int EVP_PKEY_cmp(EVP_PKEY *a, EVP_PKEY *b) nlarsch> nlarsch> Wouldn't be EVP_PKEY_cmp(const EVP_PKEY *a, const EVP_PKEY *b) nlarsch> more appropriate ? Very good point, thank you. I've now committed a change to implement that. As you can see, I constified a few more, while I was at it. nlarsch> Shouldn't we compare the parameters as well (I don't know if nlarsch> it's really necessary for the intended usage) ? There's a separate function that does that, EVP_PKEY_cmp_parameters(). -- Richard Levitte \ Spannvägen 38, II \ [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] \ S-168 35 BROMMA \ T: +46-8-26 52 47 \ SWEDEN \ or +46-708-26 53 44 Procurator Odiosus Ex Infernis -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] Member of the OpenSSL development team: http://www.openssl.org/ Unsolicited commercial email is subject to an archival fee of $400. See <http://www.stacken.kth.se/~levitte/mail/> for more info. ______________________________________________________________________ OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org Development Mailing List [EMAIL PROTECTED] Automated List Manager [EMAIL PROTECTED]