Hi Jukka,
On 02/12/2015 02:35 AM, Jukka Rissanen wrote:
Hi Denis,
On ti, 2015-02-10 at 16:42 +0200, Jukka Rissanen wrote:
> Add new function l_hashmap_find() which is similar to foreach.
> The find will start to call a user supplied function for every
> entry in hashmap. If user function returns true, then the find
> will return and not call remaining hash elements.
> ---
Just wanted to ask are you ok with func? At the moment there is no
function to traverse the hash, other than the foreach variant and it is
very sub-optimal as it will traverse the whole hash even if such a thing
is not needed by the caller. Even better option would be to change the
return parameter of foreach callback to return bool so we could do with
only one traversing function.
I'm not totally against it, so I might be convinced this is useful.
However, I really have to wonder why a hashmap is being used as a
glorified linked list? Whats the target use case?
<snip>
> void *user_data);
> +typedef bool (*l_hashmap_find_func_t) (const void *key, void *value,
> + void *user_data);
> typedef void (*l_hashmap_destroy_func_t) (void *value);
> typedef unsigned int (*l_hashmap_hash_func_t) (const void *p);
> typedef int (*l_hashmap_compare_func_t) (const void *a, const void *b);
> @@ -70,6 +72,9 @@ void *l_hashmap_lookup(struct l_hashmap *hashmap, const void
*key);
> void l_hashmap_foreach(struct l_hashmap *hashmap,
> l_hashmap_foreach_func_t function, void *user_data);
>
> +void l_hashmap_find(struct l_hashmap *hashmap,
> + l_hashmap_find_func_t function, void *user_data);
> +
If we're going to do this, then the signature should mimic
l_hashmap_lookup. e.g.
void *l_hashmap_find(struct l_hashmap *hashmap,
l_hashmap_find_func_t function,
void *user_data);
Regards,
-Denis