itaps-parallel Two options from today's iMeshP phone conference

[Jason Kraftcheck]

Saurabh Tendulkar wrote:
>>>
>>> I think for A, we proposed that the argument be NULL in case of serial.
>>> If we want no restriction in iMesh, then maybe we can instead pass an
>>> array of entity sets to iMesh_createEnt, and then in iMeshP stipulate
>>> that one of them has to be a part.
>>>
>>
>> Logically null.  Not literally 'NULL' (a bit-wise zero value).  Not all
>> implementations use pointer-based handles, and therefore zero is not an
>> invalid handle value for all implementations.  The closest thing we
>> have to
>> a logical null is the root set (as everything goes into the root set
>> anyway.)
>>
>> - jason
> 
> Don't they have to use pointer-based handles,

No.

> since
> iBase_EntitySetHandle is typedef'd as:
>   typedef struct iBase_EntitySetHandle_Private* iBase_EntitySetHandle;
> in iBase.h?
> 

The fact that a pointer is used in the typedef for a set handle does not in
any way restrict implementations to using pointers, nor is it intended to.