On lör, 2008-07-12 at 15:01 +0200, Kinkie wrote: > for what it's worth, +1. > Maybe they could be abstracted more (need to check the patch better, > will do once it's in), but it's a step forward already.
Sure it can be abstracted better, for example with a shared CARP-type template above, with the implementations only providing the keying (1-4 lines each unique in carp.cc/peer_sourcehash.cc/peer_userhash.cc) Have also thought about maybe only using a single instance in the peer struct for the carp type data, but it's useful to combine at least userhash with one of the other two as fallback (usually sourcehash)... Regards Henrik
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
