BIND 10 #299: AXFR fails half the time

[BIND 10 Development]

#299: AXFR fails half the time
-----------------------------+----------------------------------------------
      Reporter:  zzchen_pku  |        Owner:  zzchen_pku
          Type:  defect      |       Status:  reviewing 
      Priority:  major       |    Milestone:            
     Component:  xfrout      |   Resolution:            
      Keywords:              |    Sensitive:  0         
Estimatedhours:  0.0         |        Hours:  0         
      Billable:  1           |   Totalhours:  1.5       
      Internal:  0           |  
-----------------------------+----------------------------------------------
Changes (by jinmei):

  * owner:  jinmei => zzchen_pku


Comment:

 Replying to [comment:37 zzchen_pku]:

 > > Ah, okay.  But the intent is way too difficult to understand just from
 the code.  Please add comments about why we need to do that way.
 > Okay, done.
 >
 I'm afraid the "why" is not still clear.  I'd suggest something like this:
 {{{
         # check self.server._shutdown_event to ensure the real shutdown
 comes.
         # Linux could trigger a spurious readable event on the
 _shutdown_sock
         # due to a bug, so we need perform a double check.
 }}}

 > > Mostly okay, but there's one minor style issues:
 {{{
 PyObject *XFR_FD_RECEIVE_FAIL ...
 }}}
 should be
 {{{
 PyObject* XFR_FD_RECEIVE_FAIL ...
 }}}
 > I found both styles in bind10 code, not sure which one is better, and
 http://bind10.isc.org/wiki/BIND9CodingGuidelines uses the former one.
 >
 We use a different style for C++ than BIND 9 (which is written in C).
 BIND10 code guidelines are documented here:
 http://bind10.isc.org/wiki/CodingGuidelines

 Like many other style issues, 100% consistency is difficult to achive, so
 it's not surprising you found both styles.  But the agreed style is the
 latter (btw: it's not about better or worse.  It's simply a matter of
 consistency).

 With fixing the comment and the style, I'm okay with the branch.

-- 
Ticket URL: <http://bind10.isc.org/ticket/299#comment:38>
BIND 10 Development <http://bind10.isc.org>
BIND 10 Development