On Fri, 11 May 2018, Richard Biener wrote: > Looks good to me. As additional enhancement we might want to provide > (even unconditionally?) > the glibc qsort_r() interface. I remember adding various globals to > pass down state to the comparator...
Thanks. I have no plans w.r.t qsort_r, but OTOH a stable sort interface can be added with tiny size/speed cost, and the sole in-tree use can be converted :) > I agree self-tests might be good to have. Also it looks like the > qsort-checking may now be somehow > embedded within our qsort implementation? I gave self-tests some thought after David's mail, and honestly I don't see much value in that, given that we run qsort_chk on everything. As for embedding, I don't think that's necessary. I prefer to keep them separate. Alexander
