My comment would be on the case sensitivity, would be to be all lower case. 
In the long
run I think that would be the most straight forward and simplest.

Tom C.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Daniel Swarbrick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "OpenPBX.org Developers Mailing List" <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, August 14, 2006 3:38 AM
Subject: Re: [Openpbx-dev] Hashing for OpenPBX.org


> bkml wrote:
>> First, there is no function call to check the application name for a
>> match in every turn of the loop. Context switches are rather expensive
>> and we avoid them altogether by not calling strcasecmp() anymore.
>> Secondly, instead of one test per character in the application name, we
>> now have only one single test per application entry to test the hash 
>> code.
>
> That sounds great, but I have a couple of questions:
>
> 1) Will this extend to console commands (ie, command-line completion) or
> dialplan instructions only? For command-line completion, you would
> obviously still need the unhashed version of the command to compare and
> predict possible completions, since comparing a partial command will
> have no relation to the full command's hash.
>
> 2) What is the hash algorithm being used, and is a 32 bit hash too small
> (ie, collision-risky)?
>
> That was three questions really...
>
> On the issue of case sensitivity, the original Asterisk apps tend to use
> mixed case in documentation, ie "GotoIf". My preference would either be
> complete case insensitivity, or all lower-case. Case-sensitive,
> mixed-case is a stupid idea, that is bound to catch people out.
> _______________________________________________
> Openpbx-dev mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.openpbx.org/mailman/listinfo/openpbx-dev 

_______________________________________________
Openpbx-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.openpbx.org/mailman/listinfo/openpbx-dev

Reply via email to