From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.5-pre1 (2020-06-20) on ip-172-31-74-118.ec2.internal X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.5 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_05 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.5-pre1 Date: 22 Feb 93 15:32:37 GMT From: pa.dec.com!engage.pko.dec.com!nntpd.lkg.dec.com!nntpd2.cxo.dec.com!etre!w allace@decuac.dec.com (Richard Wallace) Subject: Re: generic queue packages Message-ID: <1993Feb22.153237.27462@nntpd2.cxo.dec.com> List-Id: tmm@dayvd.dayton.saic.com wrote: : I have a few questions regarding Grady Booch's generic queue packages. : : For my application, I plan on using package : Queue_Priority_Balking_Multiple_Unbounded_Managed_Iterator. I need to know i f : there is any problem using this package if my node is a variant record. : : I also need to know if it is possible to prioritize my queue on more than one : field of my record (for example, a "time" field and an "event_type" field). : : : : Toby McEvoy Toby, I've used a variant of that particular package. From "eye-balling" that code and the package you mention above, there should be no problem. Remember that a variant record will have the maximum size elements used when allocating the memory for the elements in your queue. Be aware that your element allocation code should have a robust exception handler in case your queue grows too large. The ability to prioritize the queue on multiple fields will depend on how you've constructed the queue. I'd recommend two indexes into an unordered queue. This way you can manipulate the index faster than the queue elements. Aloha, Richard Richard Wallace Senior Software Engineer Digital Equipment Corporation 301 Rockrimmon Blvd. South CXO2-1/7A Colorado Springs, CO 80919-2398 (719)548-2792 "The opinions expressed are my own, B.P. may not *quite* agree..."