On tor, 2008-05-15 at 16:11 +0200, Jan Safranek wrote: > Magnus Fromreide wrote: > > Do the rewrite affect both stream and packet sockets or only stream > > sockets? > > Currently both, but if there will be flag allowing asynchronous write, > like hardaker is suggesting, I'll have to rewrite it either. > > > What action should be taken if the remote party fails to read and to > > respond? Is this when OP_SEND_FAILED is called? > > That's the question. Currently OP_SEND_FAILED, but discussion is welcome. > > >> Comments? Thoughts? > > > > Could you please show us what you have got? > Today's snapshot is at http://people.redhat.com/jsafrane/net-snmp. Is > there any better way you prefer, like svn branches? It's really work in > progress.
patches are fine with me. Now on to commenting the code: You are changing the interface of snmp_select_info, that is a big no-no since the interface is expected to be kept stable, at least in all 5.x versions. This is also true for snmp_sess_select_info. Many coments talk about read but then the code handles write. (But then this is an early draft) Please try to keep to 80 char line width. The SNMP_MALLOC_STRUCT and SNMP_MALLOC_TYPEDEF macros can help with this. Names starting with _ are reserved for the lib implementation - do not use them here. Good that you make your helper functions static. Will look more later. /MF ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ _______________________________________________ Net-snmp-coders mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/net-snmp-coders
