On 26.10.2021 11:40, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 25, 2021 at 11:51:57AM +0000, Oleksandr Andrushchenko wrote:
>> Hi, Roger!
>> Could you please take a look at the below?
>> Jan was questioning the per BAR range set approach, so it
>> is crucial for the maintainer (you) to answer here.
> 
> I'm open to suggestions to using something different than a rangeset
> per BAR, but lacking any concrete proposal I think using rangesets is
> fine.

The main reason for my objection is that for the average BAR the
rangeset will hold exactly one range. That's not an efficient way
to express a single range.

> One possible way might be to extend rangesets so that private data
> could be stored for each rangeset range, but that would then make
> merging operations impossible, likewise splitting ranges would be
> troublesome.

Indeed, so I don't view this as an option.

Jan


Reply via email to