From owner-cvs-all  Thu Jan  3 15:20:19 2002
Delivered-To: cvs-all@freebsd.org
Received: from rwcrmhc51.attbi.com (rwcrmhc51.attbi.com [204.127.198.38])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id B6C6A37B41B; Thu,  3 Jan 2002 15:20:13 -0800 (PST)
Received: from InterJet.elischer.org ([12.232.206.8])
          by rwcrmhc51.attbi.com
          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.27 201-229-121-127-20010626) with ESMTP
          id <20020103232012.OTKE20119.rwcrmhc51.attbi.com@InterJet.elischer.org>;
          Thu, 3 Jan 2002 23:20:12 +0000
Received: from localhost (localhost.elischer.org [127.0.0.1])
	by InterJet.elischer.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id PAA25239;
	Thu, 3 Jan 2002 15:04:26 -0800 (PST)
Date: Thu, 3 Jan 2002 15:04:25 -0800 (PST)
From: Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org>
To: Garance A Drosihn <drosih@rpi.edu>
Cc: Matthew Dillon <dillon@apollo.backplane.com>,
	Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@critter.freebsd.dk>,
	Stephen McKay <mckay@thehub.com.au>, John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org>,
	cvs-all@FreeBSD.org, cvs-committers@FreeBSD.org,
	Greg Lehey <grog@FreeBSD.org>
Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/share/man/man3 queue.3
In-Reply-To: <p05101005b85a8a34d794@[128.113.24.47]>
Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0201031458330.24204-100000@InterJet.elischer.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
List-ID: <cvs-all.FreeBSD.ORG>
List-Archive: <http://docs.freebsd.org/mail/> (Web Archive)
List-Help: <mailto:majordomo@FreeBSD.ORG?subject=help> (List Instructions)
List-Subscribe: <mailto:majordomo@FreeBSD.ORG?subject=subscribe%20cvs-all>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:majordomo@FreeBSD.ORG?subject=unsubscribe%20cvs-all>
X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG



On Thu, 3 Jan 2002, Garance A Drosihn wrote:

> At 2:00 PM -0800 1/3/02, Julian Elischer wrote:
> In any case, we are not disagreeing with you just to irritate you, or
> because we don't understand what you are hoping to do.  We just think
> you're breaking a useful abstraction of "queues" (generic queues, not
> tailq-specific queues), and that you should not do that.

 I DO understand the point of making them interchangable,
but I think it's a false goal. If we wanted to make them intercangable
we'd just have "QUEUE" and not 4 (was 5) different types.

why not get rid of the 3 subset list types?
 BTW a macro name for the FOREACH termination test would be
TAILQ_FOREACH_COMPLETED(&head, var) where &head would be completely
ignored in most implementatios I think.

It's enough to make one go and write one's own rather than using the 
macros,
really...




To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message