[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <490B21AE.9030406@tpi.com>
Date: Fri, 31 Oct 2008 09:18:06 -0600
From: Tim Gardner <tcanonical@....com>
To: Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>
CC: Jörn Engel <joern@...fs.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] B+Tree library
Johannes Berg wrote:
>> +static inline size_t btree_visitorl(struct btree_headl *head, long opaque,
>> + visitorl_t func2)
>> +{
>> + return btree_visitor(&head->h, &btree_geo32, opaque, visitorl, func2);
>> +}
>
> Incidentally, do you think it would be possible to implement a kind of
>
> btree_for_each_entry(e, ...) {
> do something with e
> }
>
> macro or function/macro combination? You seem to be doing a recursive
> walk across the tree, would it be useful to have a linked list at the
> lowest level of nodes to be able to iterate more easily?
>
> johannes
What would you expect to be the behavior if you remove 'e' ? That might
cause the tree to get re-ordered. Do you restart the list traversal?
I had a similar issue once with a hash table algorithm where you could
either access elements with a hash key, or efficiently traverse the hash
table using a linked list of elements. The solution wasn't too difficult
in that case because removing an element didn't cause the table to get
re-ordered.
rtg
--
Tim Gardner tim.gardner@...onical.com
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists