From: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Date: Fri, 20 May 2011 13:23:44 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] basic priority queue implementation
Message-ID: <20110520132344.GA30616@sigill.intra.peff.net>
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTinojbxq=y3f-GPJsL7OH2OAJfW6zw@mail.gmail.com>

On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 10:13:10AM -0300, Thiago Farina wrote:

> > Speaking of naming, though, the real problem is that this data structure
> > should be called "pqueue" or something similar to indicate that it is
> > not a simple FIFO. Unfortunately, the short-and-sweet "pqueue" is taken
> > by openssl, which pollutes all over the global namespace.
> >
> Hum, yeah when I read the commit message I though about the name of
> the structure, but I didn't want to bother you with that. Probably you
> have considered the option of naming it 'priority_queue' too. Haven't
> you chose priority_queue, because you consider the name longer than
> necessary?

Exactly. Though unless somebody can come up with a practical case where
using the priority queue speeds up some operation, I don't think it is
worth applying anyway. So the naming question is somewhat academic. :)

-Peff