Subject: Re: packet capturing
To: Jason Thorpe <email@example.com>
From: Jonathan Stone <jonathan@DSG.Stanford.EDU>
Date: 01/21/2004 15:01:48
>I think you missed my point.
OK, I missed your point. The SYSCTL_SETUP() is nice.
Thanks for explaining your point so well.
Here's mine, in turn. Look at a a FreeBSD (4.x) usr/src/sys/* tree.
See at all the usages of SYSCTL_NODE(), SYSCTL_INT(), SYSCTL_STRUCT()
macros. Those guys put _themselves_ on a linker-set, they don't need
to call a function which does the variadic dance.
I'd much prefer that NetBSD have a _single_, non-variadic SYSTL_INT(),
SYSCTL_STRUCT(), SYSCTL_NODE() (ignoring the function-wrapper versus
file-scope issue for now).
The variadic constructors make that unreasonably hard to
do in Andrew's scheme.
I've dealt with both for awile fast-ipsec, opencrypto). My own
experience is that the FreeBSD scheme is much easier to read, to
write, to maintain; and to extend for ad-hoc usage.
And lest I seem curmudgeonly: as I said at the time to Andrew in
private email, what he did is a big, big improvement on what NetBSD
had before, and he deserves real credit for it. Sincerely.