[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [PATCH] Implement rehashing for associative arrays (Re: speeding up

From: Chet Ramey
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Implement rehashing for associative arrays (Re: speeding up hash_search?)
Date: Mon, 4 May 2020 16:16:06 -0400
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.14; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.7.0

On 4/20/20 5:50 PM, Greg Wooledge wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 20, 2020 at 05:12:28PM -0400, George Jones wrote:
>> No real opinion on syntax.
>> Using something existing:
>>     declare -A foo[SIZE]
>> seems sensible, especially if there was no semantic meaning (I'm not a fan
>> of syntax without semantics .... clutter).
> That's pretty C-like, and I don't have any strong dislike of it, but I
> feel I should point out that users will need to quote the final argument
> if it contains square brackets, just like with unset 'a[i]'.

If the code to skip over it didn't already exist, I wouldn't consider it.

> Another choice would be a more shell-like syntax:
> declare -s size -A foo=(...)

That's definitely more consistent with the rest of declare's options.

> I'm curious whether the size has to be specified up front when the array
> is declared, or can be adjusted on the fly. 

It could be adjusted on the fly, I suppose, but there would never really
be a reason to do it unless the size were being reduced. Otherwise, it's
ok to just let the array grow automatically.

> The shell-like syntax feels
> more natural if the size is being adjusted, since you can write
> declare -s new_size foo
> without needing to specify the -A again.  But it's not a huge difference.

This is a good point.

``The lyf so short, the craft so long to lerne.'' - Chaucer
                 ``Ars longa, vita brevis'' - Hippocrates
Chet Ramey, UTech, CWRU    address@hidden    http://tiswww.cwru.edu/~chet/

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]