I'm not sure. The IpMap implementation is a simplified version of code I used elsewhere. The original version used a customized RB-tree implementation because it needed callbacks when the tree structure was modified (and it need to be threaded as well). I left that in because it was easier than taking it out but I don't know if IpMap really needs that for ATS. We should try to minimize the number of independent implementations but we might do that by converting IpMap to use the Google B-tree. You could take IpMap as an example of what we would need out of an ordered set.
Thursday, January 30, 2014, 12:43:22 PM, you wrote: > On Thu, Jan 30, 2014 at 11:39 AM, Alan M. Carroll < > a...@network-geographics.com> wrote: >> Thursday, January 30, 2014, 12:24:43 PM, you wrote >> > https://code.google.com/p/cpp-btree/ >> > I personally need this because it implements an ordered set where all our >> > hash table implementations are obviously unordered. >> Have you looked at the red/black tree implementation in lib/ts/IpMap.h? > No, I was not aware of that. I will check it out. > Does this mean you are against including the btree implementation then?
