Updated patch: http://www.creative.net.au/diffs/20080207-squid3-nonzero-buffers-2.diff
doZeroOnPush can't be private as it then seems to be inaccessible from MemPool::push(). Adrian On Wed, Feb 06, 2008, Alex Rousskov wrote: > Adrian, > > A few comments regarding the nonzero patch you posted on IRC: > http://www.creative.net.au/diffs/20080207-squid3-nonzero-buffers.diff > > First of all, it is a move in the right direction, of course. If you > verified that it works, it can be committed as is. Here are a few > nitpicks since you asked for comments: > > - Replace "dontZeroMe()" with "zeroOnPush(bool doIt)" because negative > names are confusing and because we are not zeroing the object ("this" or > "me"), but the memory we push into it. > > - Remove virtual from dontZeroMe(). Makes folks look hard for > extensions, etc. > > - Make zeroBuffer private. Alternatively, make it public and remove the > set method. Protected data members cause weird C++ problems, > unfortunately. > > - Rename zeroBuffer to doZeroOnPush so that the association with the set > method is clear and the purpose is more precise. > > - Remove memDataNonZero() if possible. It do nothing new and we need > fewer globals. > > - Consider adding boolean aZeroOnPush parameter to memDataInit(), with > false as the default value. > > Thank you, > > Alex. > -- - Xenion - http://www.xenion.com.au/ - VPS Hosting - Commercial Squid Support - - $25/pm entry-level VPSes w/ capped bandwidth charges available in WA -
