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