apr-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Branko ─îibej <br...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Skiplist duplicates
Date Fri, 13 Mar 2015 06:45:01 GMT
On 12.03.2015 18:36, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>> No, it's a design error.  There's not much helping that... once it
>> ships, that's our implementation.  Might caution us to provide more
>> careful code review before n.n.0 releases on new features.
>
> Soooo.... if apr_snprintf("%d" were to, on every 50th int, print
> it out in decimal form, that would be a "design error"? :)
>
> If so, how can we call it a "skiplist" which has a set of compliant
> expectations? It's not a skiplist implementation at all since it
> is broken.

Just to chime in here ... wrowe is correct. Some abstract definition of
"skiplist" is irrelevant. What's relevant is our current API and
implementation and its documented and otherwise discoverable semantics.
Our versioning rules do not allow changing the semantics of a (set of)
function(s) in a backward-incompatible way.

Your analogy is a bit off ... you're arguing for something more like
changing apr_snprintf to write everything right-to-left instead of
left-to-right because, 10 years ago, that's what the intent of the
implementation was but someone accidentally changed a minus to a plus.
After all, the docs for that function don't say left-to-right ...

-- Brane

Mime
View raw message