ZEND_HASH_APPLY_* confusion

From: Date: Wed, 01 Mar 2006 19:26:23 +0000
Subject: ZEND_HASH_APPLY_* confusion
Groups: php.internals 
Request: Send a blank email to [email protected] to get a copy of this message 
Hello internals,

  we have the consts:

#define ZEND_HASH_APPLY_KEEP                            0
#define ZEND_HASH_APPLY_REMOVE                          1<<0
#define ZEND_HASH_APPLY_STOP                            1<<1

and the apply functions:
ZEND_API void zend_hash_apply(HashTable *ht, apply_func_t apply_func TSRMLS_DC);
ZEND_API void zend_hash_apply_with_argument(HashTable *ht, apply_func_arg_t apply_func, void *
TSRMLS_DC);
ZEND_API void zend_hash_apply_with_arguments(HashTable *ht, apply_func_args_t apply_func, int, ...);

as well as:
ZEND_API void zend_hash_reverse_apply(HashTable *ht, apply_func_t apply_func TSRMLS_DC);

we also have strange uscase:
static int clean_non_persistent_constant(zend_constant *c TSRMLS_DC)
{
        if (c->flags & CONST_PERSISTENT) {
                return EG(full_tables_cleanup) ? 0 : ZEND_HASH_APPLY_STOP;
        } else {
                return EG(full_tables_cleanup) ? 1 : ZEND_HASH_APPLY_REMOVE;
        }
}

which actually would be the same as:
static int clean_non_persistent_constant(zend_constant *c TSRMLS_DC)
{
        if (c->flags & CONST_PERSISTENT) {
                return EG(full_tables_cleanup) ? ZEND_HASH_APPLY_KEEP : ZEND_HASH_APPLY_REMOVE;
        } else {
                return ZEND_HASH_APPLY_REMOVE;
        }
}

because normal apply functions only consider 0 and non 0.
Only the revese apply function takes the STOP constant into account.
Now obviously the case where a mixture of integres and consts is being
used didn't lead to a problem but we should make them correct anyway.

But i think we should also aim to make all apply functions aware of the
STOP const becuase in some cases it would mean a speedup.

Best regards,
 Marcus

Thread (2 messages)

« previous php.internals (#22066) next »