[Date Prev][Date Next] [Chronological] [Thread] [Top]

Re: ordered indexing for integers

To: Hallvard B Furuseth <h.b.furuseth@usit.uio.no>
Subject: Re: ordered indexing for integers
From: Howard Chu <hyc@symas.com>
Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2007 13:29:23 -0800
Cc: OpenLDAP-devel@openldap.org
In-reply-to: <47504610.9050607@symas.com>
References: <4742F5EE.5070100@symas.com> <hbf.20071130al9x@bombur.uio.no> <hbf.20071130be5u@bombur.uio.no> <47504610.9050607@symas.com>
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; rv:1.9b2pre) Gecko/2007111122 SeaMonkey/2.0a1pre

Howard Chu wrote:

Hallvard B Furuseth wrote:
Actually, looking at lutil_str2bin() one's complement would be easier:-)
It might have been, but the current 2's complement is BER-compatible.

Which of course was the original point of lutil_str2bin, and why the previous patch broke test021. Sigh. Running all tests now. -- -- Howard Chu Chief Architect, Symas Corp. http://www.symas.com Director, Highland Sun http://highlandsun.com/hyc/ Chief Architect, OpenLDAP http://www.openldap.org/project/

References:
- ordered indexing for integers
  - From: Howard Chu <hyc@symas.com>
- Re: ordered indexing for integers
  - From: Hallvard B Furuseth <h.b.furuseth@usit.uio.no>
- Re: ordered indexing for integers
  - From: Hallvard B Furuseth <h.b.furuseth@usit.uio.no>
- Re: ordered indexing for integers
  - From: Howard Chu <hyc@symas.com>

Prev by Date: Re: Please test RE_24
Next by Date: 'monitoring disabled' message
Index(es):
- Chronological
- Thread