Satish Balay <[email protected]> writes:
> I tried looking at it - but it was easier for me to fixup current ctable code.

I mentioned it more as a long-term thing.  I don't think we need two
different hashtable implementations in PETSc.  I think khash is better
and extensible, so we may as well use it in all new code and migrate
petsctable to it when convenient.  I don't think it's urgent unless
someone has a use case that needs it.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Reply via email to