On Thu, Sep 06, 2018 at 01:04:18PM -0700, Stefan Beller wrote: > On Thu, Sep 6, 2018 at 12:12 PM Jeff King <p...@peff.net> wrote: > > > > On Thu, Sep 06, 2018 at 10:59:42AM -0400, Jeff King wrote: > > > > > > + string_list_append(&cmd_list, *argv[0]); > > > > > > This will create an unsorted list. You'd have to use > > > string_list_insert() here for a sorted list, or > > > unsorted_string_list_has_string() in the earlier call. > > > > > > It's unfortunate that string_list makes this so easy to get wrong. > > > > This is getting really off-topic (since it sounds like we'd probably > > want to use an ordered list here), but is it crazy to think that > > basically every use of an ordered string list could just be a hashmap? > > Does a hashmap guarantee an order?
No, it definitely doesn't. I guess the reading-between-the-lines assumption that I didn't quite say is: I think most (if not all) of the users of sorted string lists don't actually care about a particular order. They just want efficient lookup. > I thought we had an example of an ordered list in the submodule code > but could not find it, maybe it is gone already or did not rely on the order > as I thought. > > It turns out we make never use of a custom compare function in > the stringlist, which helps gaining confidence this use case is nowhere > to be found in the code. Plenty of code uses the default strcmp. You can find users which assume sorting by their use of string_list_insert() versus _append(). Or ones that call string_list_sort(), of course. -Peff
