On Fri, Feb 5, 2021, at 3:20 PM Hal Murray via devel <devel@ntpsec.org> wrote:
> > [Context is retrying DNS lookups when an interface appears.] > > James Browning said: > > When combined with some other code in the DNS path it is wrong-headed. > "let's > > retry DNS every 5 minutes or whenever someone acts on the netlink > socket, and > > pack on extra pool servers until we have twenty." It will probably come > back > > in a diminished form later. If you absolutely must dns_try_again > periodically > > it a couple of single line fixes to ntp_io:837 and ntp_io:325, switching > to > > true and maybe a new period respectively. > > Our code is full of quirks/hacks that catch obscure real-world cases. > Most of > the time, the code is just clutter. On the other hand, if your > environment > triggers that case, that small chunk of code is wonderful. > > I think we need a structured way of collecting and documenting this sort > of > thing. > > Should we put a big comment in the code? With a stylized tag so we can > find > them all. If you are working on other stuff, that's just adding to the > clutter. > I read on the Internet that comments are useless. I occasionally notice them despite the fade to gray tendency. Yeah, I ripped out the following. It was essentially invisible in my not-an-ide and the rat brain is fallible. - /* - ** Classic Bug 2672: Some OSes (MacOSX, Linux) don't block spoofed ::1 - */ > Should we collect the descriptions in another file and add pointers both > ways? > Possibly. If it happens I would like to start the name suggestions with 'codescars' after [1] and something I thought I had read on an Internet site but can no longer find there. [1] http://www.labelscar.com/
_______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@ntpsec.org http://lists.ntpsec.org/mailman/listinfo/devel