On May 17, 2007, at 13:45:33, Evgeniy Polyakov wrote:
On Thu, May 17, 2007 at 07:26:07PM +0200, Jan Engelhardt
([email protected]) wrote:
My plan was to move this code to lib/ sooner or later. If you
consider it useful in its current state, I can do it immediatly.
And if someone else merged a superior btree library I'd happily
remove mine and use the new one instead.
Opinions?
Why would we need another btree, when there is lib/rbtree.c? Or
does yours do something fundamentally different?
It is not red-black tree, it is b+ tree.
It might be better to use the prefix "bptree" to help prevent
confusion. A quick google search on "bp-tree" reveals only the perl B
+-tree module "Tree::BPTree", a U-Maryland Java CS project on B+-
trees, and a news article about a "BP tree-top protest".
Cheers,
Kyle Moffett
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
