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. Thanks, NeilBrown
