🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <DANIELV.95Oct29220521@crt0.crt>,
Daniel Villeneuve <danielv@crt.umontreal.ca> wrote:
%Maybe the expression `a conforming comparison function' is not clear.  In
%the context of my previous article (keeping ordered sets of structures), I
%wanted a comparison function that could be called by a sorting device (such
%as an AVL tree interface) to order items unambiguously, given that no two
%items were the same.  No more hypotheses are made on those items.
%
%After having read the previous replies about that article, I agree that the
%comparison operators < and >, if fed with invalid arguments, could lead
%to `undefined result' that could be like random (if the result exists).
%
%So my comparison functions, to be conforming, should rely on some unique
%identifier in the structures (such as an integer telling the position of
%the structure in the global list), instead of the pointer on each
%structure, even though this pointer _is_ a unique identifier for the
%structure.

And what about memcmp? I guess that you have to use memmove instead of =
to do pointer assignments...





						Philip Homburg