Re: improved orddict performance
Raimo Niskanen <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.lang.erlang.patches |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On Thu, Oct 03, 2013 at 10:27:42PM -0500, Rich Neswold wrote: > On Thu, Oct 3, 2013 at 7:58 PM, Steve Vinoski <[email protected]> wrote: > > > OK, Anthony brought up yet another issue with my previous modified > > orddict, which is that if someone passes an improper list instead of an > > orddict, the new version acts differently than the old. Since the goal is > > backwards compatibility with improved performance, I've added a fourth > > commit that deals with these issues. > > > > I'm not sure whether this is the backwards compatibility one wants to > preserve. Usually you want to preserve an API, but in this case you're > preserving code that manipulates the internal representation of an orddict. > Any code that uses the orddict API should not end up with an improper list. > Any code that passes an improper list to orddict should break. But in the case of orddict, it is actually documented to have a data representation being an ordered list of key-value tuples. Therefore there is a possibility that someone has misused that knowledge and uses an improper ordered list of key-value tuples, which may not be violating the documentation... > > -- > Rich > _______________________________________________ > erlang-patches mailing list > [email protected] > http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-patches -- / Raimo Niskanen, Erlang/OTP, Ericsson AB _______________________________________________ erlang-patches mailing list [email protected] http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-patches