Date: Sun, 20 Nov 2005 20:56:05 +0000 From: Brian Candler <B.Candler@pobox.com> To: Giorgos Keramidas <keramida@hellug.gr> Cc: Tim Kientzle <kientzle@freebsd.org>, freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Order of files with 'cp' Message-ID: <20051120205605.GB19791@uk.tiscali.com> In-Reply-To: <20051120193416.GB1599@flame.pc> References: <20051116161540.GB4383@uk.tiscali.com> <437F7E22.5050800@freebsd.org> <20051120193416.GB1599@flame.pc>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, Nov 20, 2005 at 09:34:16PM +0200, Giorgos Keramidas wrote:
> qsort() can be 'stable' enough for our purposes if the comparison
> function uses something like this:
>
> int
> compare_int32_t(void *pa, void *pb)
> {
> int32_t a, b;
>
> assert(pa != NULL && pb != NULL);
> a = *((int32_t *)pa);
> b = *((int32_t *)pb);
>
> if (a < b && pa != pb)
> return 1;
> if (a > b && pa != pb)
> return -1;
> return 0;
> }
Care to explain??
For one thing, I don't think qsort() will ever call its comparison function
with two equal pointers, as that would be a point(er)less thing to do.
Therefore, I can't see why you are testing for pa != pb, since this
condition will always be true. (Also, a < b could never be true if pa == pb).
Secondly, mastercmp() doesn't compare integers, it compares FTS structures.
The comparison function just compares whether one item is a directory and
the other a file. How would you have mastercmp() work instead?
Regards,
Brian.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20051120205605.GB19791>