Re: More specifics Re: Something lighter than a database file . . .

On Tue, 2006-03-07 at 10:04 -0800, James H H Lampert wrote:

> Likewise, a *USRIDX (and maybe also a keyed *DTAQ as well; 
> I haven't read through all the docs on them yet) doesn't 
> appear to have any way to retrieve in arrival sequence, so 
> it would, by itself, leave us with no way of knowing which 
> requests we'd processed and which ones we hadn't.

How about rolling your own?  I wanted a list that I could extend at
will, so I wrote a simple linked list module.  Perhaps you could use
something similar?

http://code.midrange.com/index.php?id=2d5be1efe1


It is trivial to scan the list for duplicates, but it takes linear time.

Regards,
Rich