Changing the way I wasy accessing elements inside the list. Previosuly, I was

directly using the next and the previous pointers for navigating inside the 
list. Now, I am changing these to use the lists built-in lists.

This commit was SVN r1019.

src/info/info.c

@@ -64,19 +64,15 @@ void lam_info_entry_destruct(lam_info_entry_t *entry) {
  */
 int lam_info_dup (lam_info_t *info, lam_info_t **newinfo) {
     int err;
-    int nkeys;
     lam_info_entry_t *iterator;
 
-    err = lam_info_get_nkeys (info, &nkeys);
-
     for (iterator = (lam_info_entry_t *)lam_list_get_first(&(info->super));
-         nkeys > 0;
-         nkeys--) {
+         NULL != iterator;
+         iterator = (lam_info_entry_t *)lam_list_get_next(iterator)) {
          err = lam_info_set(*newinfo, iterator->ie_key, iterator->ie_value);
          if (MPI_SUCCESS != err) {
             return err;
          }
-         iterator = (lam_info_entry_t *)iterator->super.lam_list_next;
      }
      return MPI_SUCCESS;
 }
@@ -137,10 +133,8 @@ int lam_info_set (lam_info_t *info, char *key, char *value) {
  */
 int lam_info_free (lam_info_t **info) {
     lam_info_entry_t *iterator;
-    int nkeys;
-    int err;
+    lam_info_entry_t *trailer_iterator;
 
-    err = lam_info_get_nkeys(*info, &nkeys);
     /*
      * We could just get each element from the list and then call
      * MPI_Info_delete. But this causes unnecessary delay because
@@ -148,10 +142,10 @@ int lam_info_free (lam_info_t **info) {
      * remove operation to save time.
      */
      for (iterator = (lam_info_entry_t *)lam_list_get_first(&((*info)->super));
-          nkeys > 0;
-          nkeys--) {
-          iterator = (lam_info_entry_t *)iterator->super.lam_list_next;
-          OBJ_RELEASE(iterator->super.lam_list_prev);
+          NULL != iterator;
+          iterator = (lam_info_entry_t *)lam_list_get_next(iterator)) {
+          trailer_iterator = (lam_info_entry_t *)lam_get_prev(iterator);
+          OBJ_RELEASE(trailer_iterator);
      }
      /*
       * Anju:

src/info/info.h

@@ -83,20 +83,17 @@ int lam_info_get_valuelen (lam_info_t *info, char *key, int *valuelen,
 static inline lam_info_entry_t *lam_info_find_key (lam_info_t *info, 
                                                    char *key) {
     lam_info_entry_t *iterator;
-    int nkeys;
 
     /* Iterate over all the entries. If the key is found, then 
      * return immediately. Else, the loop will fall of the edge
      * and NULL is returned
      */
-    nkeys = lam_list_get_size(&(info->super));
     for (iterator = (lam_info_entry_t *)lam_list_get_first(&(info->super));
-         nkeys > 0;
-         nkeys--) {
+         NULL != iterator;
+         iterator = (lam_info_entry_t *)lam_list_get_next(iterator)) {
         if (0 == strcmp(key, iterator->ie_key)) {
             return iterator;
         }
-        iterator = (lam_info_entry_t *)iterator->super.lam_list_next;
     }
     return (lam_info_entry_t *)0;
 }
@@ -130,10 +127,13 @@ lam_info_get_nthkey (lam_info_t *info, int n, char *key) {
     /*
      * Iterate over and over till we get to the nth key
      */
-    iterator = (lam_info_entry_t *)lam_list_get_first(&(info->super));
-    for ( ; n > 0; n--) {
-        iterator = (lam_info_entry_t *)
-        iterator->super.lam_list_next;
+    for (iterator = (lam_info_entry_t *)lam_list_get_first(&(info->super));
+         n > 0;
+         n--) {
+         iterator = (lam_info_entry_t *)lam_list_get_next(iterator);
+         if ( NULL == iterator) {
+             return MPI_ERR_ARG;
+         }
     }
     /*
      * iterator is of the type lam_list_item_t. We have to