Re: [PATCH] issue #4134 (partial): sort deleted nodes before dumping them

On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 03:09:01PM -0400, Greg Stein wrote:
> Why ever would we want to rely in any way on a hash table iterator's order?
> What!?
 
You misunderstood what I wrote. I'm not suggesting we do so.

I was just assuming that the APR-1.4.5 resulted in lexically sorted
output (and apparently I was wrong about this, see Dustin's reply).

> We want a stable ordering. That generally means "sort" rather "hash table
> implementation details".

Yes, we agreed on that weeks ago.
Received on 2012-05-31 21:15:22 CEST