> > No, it's a design error. There's not much helping that... once it > ships, that's our implementation. Might caution us to provide more > careful code review before n.n.0 releases on new features.
Soooo.... if apr_snprintf("%d" were to, on every 50th int, print
it out in decimal form, that would be a "design error"? :)
If so, how can we call it a "skiplist" which has a set of compliant
expectations? It's not a skiplist implementation at all since it
is broken.
