* Julian Elischer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [011116 18:20] wrote:
> On Fri, 16 Nov 2001, Jonathan Lemon wrote:
> > Um, no please.  MT_DUMMYNET is a bad hack that should be removed
> > (and which I've partly done in one of my trees).  I would rather
> > not perpetuate this, it causes more problems than it is worth.
> > 
> > I believe that Garrett went in a while back and removed all the
> > abuses of mbuf (used to store sockaddrs and the like), and this
> > would appear to be a step backward.
> > 
> > I don't disagree that there are many static variables that need
> > to be cleaned up, but I don't believe that this is the right 
> > approach.
> sure, but how about some suggestions then?
> personally Holding static things in mbufs is an abuse,
> and even things that are dynamic but can be better
> passed as an argument.
> Maybe just some extra arguments can cover it..
> but that's not very extensible, and you can't queue arguments.

Ah, but you can't queue static variable either. :)

-Alfred Perlstein [[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
'Instead of asking why a piece of software is using "1970s technology,"
 start asking why software is ignoring 30 years of accumulated wisdom.'

To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message

Reply via email to