-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 5
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Empty handle #22
Comments
There aren't really empty handles. In my context I'm using the entire
namespace. 0 is a valid handle. You might want to do something different.
…On Thu, May 23, 2019, 18:18 Glenn Hickey ***@***.***> wrote:
This is probably a dumb question, but what's the best way to check if a
handle is empty? This comes up, for example, when replacing code of the type
Node* node = nullptr;
// do some stuff
if (node != nullptr) {
// more stuff
}
Obviously, I can do the same thing with a handle_t*, but that's pretty
ugly. I'd rather use handle_t directly. Is there a way to do this?
—
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#22?email_source=notifications&email_token=AABDQEJZTC42GW7SO7GXVMTPW27WVA5CNFSM4HPIGHWKYY3PNVWWK3TUL52HS4DFUVEXG43VMWVGG33NNVSW45C7NFSM4GVQG7MQ>,
or mute the thread
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AABDQEMM3N53DRLVNM5WD2LPW27WVANCNFSM4HPIGHWA>
.
|
Any suggestions? Can I switch from handles to id's and assume id==0 is a
null id?
On Thu, May 23, 2019 at 12:56 PM Erik Garrison <[email protected]>
wrote:
… There aren't really empty handles. In my context I'm using the entire
namespace. 0 is a valid handle. You might want to do something different.
On Thu, May 23, 2019, 18:18 Glenn Hickey ***@***.***> wrote:
> This is probably a dumb question, but what's the best way to check if a
> handle is empty? This comes up, for example, when replacing code of the
type
>
> Node* node = nullptr;
> // do some stuff
> if (node != nullptr) {
> // more stuff
> }
>
> Obviously, I can do the same thing with a handle_t*, but that's pretty
> ugly. I'd rather use handle_t directly. Is there a way to do this?
>
> —
> You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
> Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
> <
#22?email_source=notifications&email_token=AABDQEJZTC42GW7SO7GXVMTPW27WVA5CNFSM4HPIGHWKYY3PNVWWK3TUL52HS4DFUVEXG43VMWVGG33NNVSW45C7NFSM4GVQG7MQ
>,
> or mute the thread
> <
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AABDQEMM3N53DRLVNM5WD2LPW27WVANCNFSM4HPIGHWA
>
> .
>
—
You are receiving this because you authored the thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#22?email_source=notifications&email_token=AAG373WTK7ZCDLO2UU7A6JDPW3EDRA5CNFSM4HPIGHWKYY3PNVWWK3TUL52HS4DFVREXG43VMVBW63LNMVXHJKTDN5WW2ZLOORPWSZGODWC25OY#issuecomment-495300283>,
or mute the thread
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAG373U5SJ6U7HV24FYEWNLPW3EDRANCNFSM4HPIGHWA>
.
|
I'll just add, this seems like a hole in the interface. Is it unreasonable to have a |
I guess that's fine. What would produce it?
It's kind of like the one past end step iterator things we have. There, we
need a way to signal that a path is done.
…On Thu, May 23, 2019, 19:18 Glenn Hickey ***@***.***> wrote:
I'll just add, this seems like a hole in the interface. Is it unreasonable
to have a null_handle constant value somewhere and ask all
implementations to never use it for a valid handle? Adding this wouldn't
affect existing client code nor, I suspect, most graph implementations.
—
You are receiving this because you commented.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#22?email_source=notifications&email_token=AABDQELRRM6OA3PVWEN5HODPW3GWNA5CNFSM4HPIGHWKYY3PNVWWK3TUL52HS4DFVREXG43VMVBW63LNMVXHJKTDN5WW2ZLOORPWSZGODWC4XGY#issuecomment-495307675>,
or mute the thread
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AABDQEJ3UEPL74SNG35APB3PW3GWNANCNFSM4HPIGHWA>
.
|
I think the fact that we can declare all these handles without initializing them means we should be able to check if they're null/empty. For regular handle's I was just thinking something simple as #23. |
This is probably a dumb question, but what's the best way to check if a handle is empty? This comes up, for example, when replacing code of the type
Obviously, I can do the same thing with a
handle_t*
, but that's pretty ugly. I'd rather usehandle_t
directly. Is there a way to do this?The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: