Re: Using qsort(3) in the kernel

To: "Martin S. Weber" <Ephaeton%gmx.net@localhost>
Subject: Re: Using qsort(3) in the kernel
From: David Holland <dholland-tech%netbsd.org@localhost>
Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2008 20:22:06 +0000

On Sun, Nov 16, 2008 at 03:19:41PM -0500, Martin S. Weber wrote:
 > Yes that's obvious. Given my background in functional languages I'm
 > just intrigued by the statement 'recursive is bad, imperative
 > for/while loops are good'.

Loops are generally easier for both the programmer and compiler to
deal with. :-p

-- 
David A. Holland
dholland%netbsd.org@localhost

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Using qsort(3) in the kernel
  - From: Johnny Billquist
- Re: Using qsort(3) in the kernel
  - From: David Laight

References:
- Using qsort(3) in the kernel (was: CVS commit: src)
  - From: Matthias Scheler
- Re: Using qsort(3) in the kernel (was: CVS commit: src)
  - From: kamel derouiche
- Re: Using qsort(3) in the kernel (was: CVS commit: src)
  - From: Steven M. Bellovin
- Re: Using qsort(3) in the kernel (was: CVS commit: src)
  - From: Martin S. Weber
- Re: Using qsort(3) in the kernel
  - From: Anders Magnusson
- Re: Using qsort(3) in the kernel
  - From: Martin S. Weber

Prev by Date: Re: Using qsort(3) in the kernel
Next by Date: Re: options RND_COM considered dangeous
Previous by Thread: Re: Using qsort(3) in the kernel
Next by Thread: Re: Using qsort(3) in the kernel
Indexes:

Home | Main Index | Thread Index | Old Index