[erlang-questions] ets:next/2 behavior - set vs. ordered_set
Tue Sep 13 01:30:24 CEST 2011
Yes, that is my plan after the basic features and tests are in place.
On 2011/09/13, at 6:17, Jachym Holecek <freza@REDACTED> wrote:
> # Joseph Wayne Norton 2011-09-12:
>> I'm currently developing a disk based clone of the ets application.
> Interesting, I was considering doing something like that for an upcoming
> project -- are you planning to make the result open source by any chance?
>> During testing with QuickCheck and Proper, I stumbled upon a difference between
>> set and ordered_set for the real ets:next/2 operation.
>> The last command exits with badarg rather than '$end_of_table' as I would expect.
>> Can someone comment on this behavior? Is this a bug? Is this a documentation bug?
> FWIW I've always read this:
> next(Tab, Key1) -> Key2 | '$end_of_table'
> Returns the next key Key2, following the key Key1 in the table Tab.
> as "behaviour is undefined if Key1 isn't a key in Tab". That ordered_set
> tables support even non-key items has been mentioned on the mailing list
> in passing some while ago, I've found it very surprising...
> -- Jachym
More information about the erlang-questions