This is the mail archive of the libc-alpha@sourceware.org mailing list for the glibc project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: [COMMITED][v2] manual: Remove incorrect claim that qsort() can be stabilized

From: Paul Eggert <eggert at cs dot ucla dot edu>
To: OndÅej BÃlka <neleai at seznam dot cz>
Cc: Anders Kaseorg <andersk at MIT dot EDU>, Florian Weimer <fweimer at redhat dot com>, libc-alpha at sourceware dot org
Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2014 21:39:05 -0800
Subject: Re: [COMMITED][v2] manual: Remove incorrect claim that qsort() can be stabilized
Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
References: <alpine dot DEB dot 2 dot 02 dot 1407022115210 dot 28890 at all-night-tool dot MIT dot EDU> <20141210154909 dot GA31968 at domone>

OndÅej BÃlka wrote:

+The addresses passed to the comparison function need not correspond with
+the original location of the objects, and need not even lie within the
+original array.

The last clause is incorrect. C11 and POSIX both require that the addressespassed to the comparison function must point to elements of the original array,and glibc qsort conforms to the standards here. Please fix this.

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [COMMITED][v2] manual: Remove incorrect claim that qsort() can be stabilized
  - From: Florian Weimer
- Re: [COMMITED][v2] manual: Remove incorrect claim that qsort() can be stabilized
  - From: Andreas Schwab

References:
- [COMMITED][v2] manual: Remove incorrect claim that qsort() can be stabilized
  - From: OndÅej BÃlka

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]