Re: rb_tree_iterate(3) documentation vs. implementation

[David Young <dyoung%pobox.com@localhost>]

On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 11:59:02AM -0500, David Young wrote:
> Regarding pr/46034, the manual describes one behavior for
> rb_tree_iterate(3), while the implementation actually provides another.
> The behavior described in the manual seems much more sensible and
> useful, and I would like to change the implementation to match: see the
> attached patch.

Joerg points out that my patch isn't complete, the RB_TREE_MIN() and
_MAX() routines need to be fixed.

Dave


-- 
David Young
dyoung%pobox.com@localhost    Urbana, IL    (217) 721-9981