From: Jonathan Nieder <firstname.lastname@example.org> To: Jeff King <email@example.com> Cc: firstname.lastname@example.org, Tim Schumacher <email@example.com>, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com Subject: Re: ordered string-list considered harmful, was Re: [PATCH v3] Allow aliases that include other aliases Date: Thu, 6 Sep 2018 23:32:41 -0700 [thread overview] Message-ID: <20180907063241.GA172953@aiede.svl.corp.google.com> (raw) In-Reply-To: <20180907032401.GB31728@sigill.intra.peff.net> Jeff King wrote: > I don't see any point in generating a sorted list and _then_ making an > auxiliary hashmap. My idea was that if you're using a sorted string-list > for lookup, then you can replace the whole thing with a hash (inserting > as you go, rather than sorting at the end). What if I'm sorting a string list in preparation for emitting a sorted list, and I *also* want to perform lookups in that same list? In other words: [...] > I think Stefan pointed out a "case 4" in the other part of the thread: > ones where we really care not just about fast lookup, but actual > iteration order. I had assumed that that was the whole point of this data structure. Anything else that is using it for lookups should indeed use a hash map instead, and I can take my share of blame for missing this kind of thing in review. [...] > I think I like the hashmap way, if the conversion isn't too painful. If we don't have any callers that actually need the sort-and-lookup thing, then yay, let's get rid of it. But I don't actually think of this as the hashmap way. It's the get-rid-of-the-unneeded-feature way. In other words, *regardless* of what else we should do, we should update any callers that want a hashmap to use a hashmap. Please go ahead, even if it doesn't let us simplify the string list API at all. Thanks, Jonathan
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-09-07 6:32 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2018-09-06 19:12 Jeff King 2018-09-06 19:20 ` Jeff King 2018-09-06 23:50 ` Jonathan Nieder 2018-09-07 3:24 ` Jeff King 2018-09-07 6:32 ` Jonathan Nieder [this message] 2018-09-07 7:20 ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason 2018-09-07 7:23 ` Jonathan Nieder 2018-09-08 16:49 ` brian m. carlson 2018-09-07 14:48 ` Jeff King 2018-09-06 20:04 ` Stefan Beller 2018-09-06 20:49 ` Jeff King 2018-09-06 20:54 ` Stefan Beller 2018-09-07 3:12 ` Jeff King
Reply instructions: You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email using any one of the following methods: * Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client, and reply-to-all from there: mbox Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style * Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to switches of git-send-email(1): git send-email \ --in-reply-to=20180907063241.GA172953@aiede.svl.corp.google.com \ --firstname.lastname@example.org \ --email@example.com \ --firstname.lastname@example.org \ --email@example.com \ --firstname.lastname@example.org \ --email@example.com \ --subject='Re: ordered string-list considered harmful, was Re: [PATCH v3] Allow aliases that include other aliases' \ /path/to/YOUR_REPLY https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html * If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).