Toni et al, > The Windows API is a C-API that covers many things including data > types like (thread-safe) lists...
Interesting, I had to read this twice to follow you, but I get it. Yeah, now that I'm actually using libJudy a lot myself, I wish Judy arrays were defined or typedef'd data types, so it would both be harder to screw up, and clearer (more self-documenting) when I declare them. > Then you will have the problem Judy has right now. Then again, it's not a huge problem, I think, due to the "clever" use libJudy makes of the "typed pointers" (patent number something or other :-) that allow it to error out with, "you sent me something that's not pointer to my type of data." Yes, a compile-time error would be better than a run-time error that you must track down (back to Judy.h). So much is obvious in hindsight. We had a "perfectly good" Judy III in hand, then ate up much more time, and code expansion, creating Judy IV than we expected, and then the project was canceled. We were lucky to get Judy IV wrapped up as cleanly as we could, and get it open-sourced, before they pulled the plug. > RE: Error handling in Judy I didn't read this as closely, but certainly there's room for improvement. I hope Doug reads and incorporates your suggestions if he agrees. Thanks, Alan Silverstein ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ _______________________________________________ Judy-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/judy-devel
