Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 12:12 PM, Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos
> wrote:
>> 4. hash_pjw_s_no_tablesize()
>> We can eliminate (2), but still there are 3 variants of the same
>> function. Maybe it is better to keep only (4) and (1) for backwards
>> compatibility, and anybo
On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 12:12 PM, Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos
wrote:
> 4. hash_pjw_s_no_tablesize()
> We can eliminate (2), but still there are 3 variants of the same
> function. Maybe it is better to keep only (4) and (1) for backwards
> compatibility, and anybody who wants to do the % tablesize to d
On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 9:07 AM, Paul Eggert wrote:
> It might be better to not have the tablesize
> arg, at least in a variant of the function.
This would result to 4 functions instead:
1. the original hash_pjw()
2. hash_pjw_no_tablesize()
3. hash_pjw_s()
4. hash_pjw_s_no_tablesize()
We can eli
On 09/26/2012 11:34 PM, Simon Josefsson wrote:
> Is there any reason localename.c contains duplicated code instead of
> depending on the hash-pjw module?
Not that I know of, no.
localename.c is not the only other .c file that has a copy, if memory serves.
It might be better to not have the tablesize
arg, at least in a variant of the function.
Paul Eggert writes:
> On 09/26/2012 11:34 PM, Simon Josefsson wrote:
>> Is there any reason localename.c contains duplicated code instead of
>> depending on the hash-pjw module?
>
> Not that I know of, no.
>
> localename.c is not the only other .c file that has a copy, if memory serves.
clean-te
On 09/27/2012 05:13 AM, Paul Eggert wrote:
> On 09/26/2012 09:40 AM, Jim Meyering wrote:
>> Yes, switching it to LGPLv2+ is fine with me.
> OK, thanks, I did that.
Thank you. Attached you'll find a patch to add hash_pjw_s() and a
different patch which returns the full number if requested in hash
Paul Eggert writes:
> On 09/25/2012 06:19 AM, Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos wrote:
>
>> Would it be possible to relicense hash-pjw under LGPLv2+ or v3+?
>
> Makes sense to me, since the same code is distributed elsewhere
> in gnulib under LGPLv2+ -- see localename.c. Jim?
Is there any reason localen
On 09/26/2012 09:40 AM, Jim Meyering wrote:
> Yes, switching it to LGPLv2+ is fine with me.
OK, thanks, I did that.
Paul Eggert wrote:
> On 09/25/2012 06:19 AM, Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos wrote:
>
>> Would it be possible to relicense hash-pjw under LGPLv2+ or v3+?
>
> Makes sense to me, since the same code is distributed elsewhere
> in gnulib under LGPLv2+ -- see localename.c. Jim?
Yes, switching it to LGPLv2+ i
On 09/25/2012 06:19 AM, Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos wrote:
> Would it be possible to relicense hash-pjw under LGPLv2+ or v3+?
Makes sense to me, since the same code is distributed elsewhere
in gnulib under LGPLv2+ -- see localename.c. Jim?
> Also would it be possible to have a version that works w
Hello,
Would it be possible to relicense hash-pjw under LGPLv2+ or v3+? It
is quite a useful function and I'd like to use it in gnutls and
libtasn1 (I could re-implement it but I'd like to avoid that if
possible). Also would it be possible to have a version that works with
non-null terminated stri
12 matches
Mail list logo