On Fri, Dec 08, 2000 at 11:50:47AM -0800, rbb@covalent.net wrote:
>...
> > and loop through an arbitrary number of reads, incrementing until the totals
> > matched. That's the least intrusive approach. I'll implement it if people agree.
> > Thoughts?
>
> split_any needs to make sure it is splitting at the correct
> location. However, now we are talking about a different function, which
> is a brigade split based on offset. If that is what we are after, then
> the name is incorrect.
Hrm. True. If you have a pipe bucket and you ask to split at 1000, but the
pipe contains 500, then you're actually splitting *past* the pipe and into
the brigade.
I'd be *quite* happy to rename it as "ap_brigade_split()".
And to have it return the bucket pointer where the split occurs. (that isn't
super clear...) Like so:
brigade split-head
\ \
B1 -> B2 -> B3 -> B4 -> B5 -> B6
Cheers,
-g
--
Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/
|