Peter Memishian wrote: > > > As I recall, my thought was that we would store the data in ASCII anyway, > > > so having the API allow arbitrarily-typed data seemed messy. Further, in > > > the above calsl, I'm not sure how the routines would know to treat vid as > > > a 16-bit unsigned integer unless it knows the type of FVLANID. But then > > > why pass the size? > > > > > So your comments are strictly related to the format in the configuration > > file? If so, I understand. But if we have to convert each fields into > > strings before we write it, and convert the string back to the fields from > > the string, that would cause inconvenience to the caller. > > > > Can we just add another argument to the API to indicate the type of the > > field, similar to the "KSTAT_DATA_ULONG, KSTAT_DATA_CHAR ..." in the kstat > > interfaces. > > Are we sure our datatypes will always be that simple (e.g., will link > properties be returned from these interfaces too)? It seems more flexible > to me to leave the interpretation of the data to the caller. > In a complex case, one can always use DATA_STR type and let the caller to interpret the data.
- Cathy
