On 2025/3/12 06:55, NeilBrown wrote:
On Mon, 10 Mar 2025, Gao Xiang wrote:
- Your new api covers narrow cases compared to the existing
api, although all in-tree callers may be converted
properly, but it increases mental burden of all users.
And maybe complicate future potential users again which
really have to "check NULL elements in the middle of page
bulk allocating" again.
I think that the current API adds a mental burden for most users. For
most users, their code would be much cleaner if the interface accepted
an uninitialised array with length, and were told how many pages had
been stored in that array.>
A (very) few users benefit from the complexity. So having two
interfaces, one simple and one full-featured, makes sense.
Ok, I think for this part, diferrent people has different
perference on API since there is no absolutely right and
wrong in the API design area.
But I have no interest to follow this for now.
Thanks,
Gao Xiang
