| Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Age | Files | Lines |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
PR: 140615
Submitted by: Andrius Morkunas <hinokind@gmail.com>
MFC after: 3 days
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Last year I added SLIST_REMOVE_NEXT and STAILQ_REMOVE_NEXT, to remove
entries behind an element in the list, using O(1) time. I recently
discovered NetBSD also has a similar macro, called SLIST_REMOVE_AFTER.
In my opinion this approach is a lot better:
- It doesn't have the unused first argument of the list pointer. I added
this, mainly because OpenBSD also had it.
- The _AFTER suffix makes a lot more sense, because it is related to
SLIST_INSERT_AFTER. _NEXT is only used to iterate through the list.
The reason why I want to rename this now, is to make sure we don't
release a major version with the badly named macros.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Even though single linked lists allow items to be removed at constant time
(when the previous element is known), the queue macro's don't allow this.
Implement new REMOVE_NEXT() macro's. Because the REMOVE() macro's also
contain the same code, make it call REMOVE_NEXT().
The OpenBSD version of SLIST_REMOVE_NEXT() needs a reference to the list
head, even though it is unused. We'd better mimic this. The STAILQ version
also needs a reference to the list. This means the prototypes of both
macro's are the same.
Approved by: philip (mentor)
PR: kern/121117
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
in the man page update.
PR: docs/94938
Submitted by: Ed Schouten <ed@fxq.nl>
MFC After: 3 days
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
If a tail queue is empty the return value of TAILQ_LAST is not
undefined, it is NULL.
Submitted by: Ruslan Ermilov <ru@FreeBSD.org>
|
|
|
|
| |
undefined, it is NULL.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
deletion' example.
MFC after: 1 week
|
|
|
|
|
| |
PR: 75581
Submitted by: Nobuyuki Koganemaru n-kogane@syd.odn.ne.jp (original version)
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Asked with "please" by Ruslan Ermilov. I've always had a weakness
for "please".
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
PR: 20024
Submitted by: Tony Finch <dot@dotat.at> (TAILQ_CONCAT, slightly changed
by me)
Reviewed by: ru (earlier version)
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
(TAILQ_FOREACH leaves the variable NULL if there were no more to do)
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
cd src/share; find man[1-9] -type f|xargs perl -pi -e 's/[ \t]+$//'
BTW, what editors are the culprits? I'm using vim and it shows
me whitespace at EOL in troff files with a thick blue block...
Reviewed by: Silence from cvs diff -b
MFC after: 7 days
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
PR: 25184
Submitted by: Alex Kapranoff <alex@kapran.bitmcnit.bryansk.su>
Approved by: nik
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Retire them before anybody starts to use them again.
Use TAILQ instead, it provides the same functionality.
|
|
|
|
|
| |
called 'elm'. It doesn't take an arg 'elm', it simply removes the
element at the head of the list.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
(2) fix a STAILQ_HEAD that should have been STAILQ_FIRST
Requested by: (1) bde
(2) W Gerald Hicks <jhix@mindspring.com>
|
|
|
|
| |
Submitted by: Jake Burkholder <jburkhol@home.com>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
TAILQ_REMOVE_HEAD.
PR: docs/17590
Submitted by: Benno Rice <benno@netizen.com.au>
|
|
|
|
|
| |
PR: docs/15036
Submitted by: Jake Burkholder <jburkhol@home.com>
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
PR: 6868
Submitted by: Josh Gilliam <josh@quick.net>
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Is it time to split this into one "intro" type and a number of
detailed pages ?
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
exactly as I did (should have checked there first I guess) except my
macro for TAILQ_INSERT_BEFORE took an unneeded arg. We now match 4.4Lite2.
Suggested by: Jeffrey Hsu <hsu@FreeBSD.org>
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Change examples to actually free() the nodes removed from lists.
Give examples of faster list deletion routines.
|
|
|