Karsten Blees <karsten.bl...@gmail.com> writes:

>> Because I had an experience under my belt of a painful refactoring
>> of "the_index" which turned out to be not just a single array, I
>> simply suspect that the final data structure to represent a "set of
>> config-like things" will not be just a single hashmap, hence I do
>> prefer to have one layer of abstraction "struct config_set", which
>> would contain a hashmap and possibly more.  Doesn't "is the hashmap
>> initialized" bit belong there, for example?
> Would an additional
>   int hashmap_is_initialized(constr struct hashmap *map)
>   {
>     return !!map->table;
>   }
> API help? (Note that hashmap_free() already does memset(0), so the
> usual notion of "zero memory means unitialized" applies).

It may remove the need for the separate "hashmap_initialized" bit
that was implemented as a file-scope global in the patch.

I however am not convinced that it will be the _only_ thing other
than the hashmap we would need to use to keep track of the in-core
"set of config-like things", and usually a blanket statement "these
are the only thing we would ever need" tends not to hold for long,

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to