BIND 10 #1528: Interface detection on Linux refactoring

[BIND 10 Development]

#1528: Interface detection on Linux refactoring
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
                   Reporter:  tomek  |                 Owner:  tomek
                       Type:         |                Status:  reviewing
  enhancement                        |             Milestone:  Sprint-
                   Priority:         |  DHCP-20120402
  medium                             |            Resolution:
                  Component:         |             Sensitive:  0
  libdhcp                            |           Sub-Project:  DHCP
                   Keywords:         |  Estimated Difficulty:  0
            Defect Severity:  N/A    |           Total Hours:  0
Feature Depending on Ticket:         |
        Add Hours to Ticket:  0      |
                  Internal?:  0      |
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Changes (by stephen):

 * owner:  stephen => tomek


Comment:

 '''src/lib/dhcp/iface_mgr_linux.cc'''
 I still had concern over the comments, so I've made some changes: only to
 the comments, although I've added/deleted some spaces.  The changes have
 been pushed: please review.


 >...BOOST_STATIC_ASSERT(sizeof(nlmsghdr) == offsetof(req,generic) ); But
 it does not work. Compiler complains about a comma not being allowed in
 macro. I think gcc is confused and thinks that two parameters are passed
 to BOOST_STATIC_ASSERT that takes only one.
 I suggest using a plain "assert()" instead.  The run-time overhead is
 negligible but it is a useful additional check.

 > And what benefit that would give us? I would rather work on something
 useful instead.
 The additional overhead of making it an explicit class is not much, and it
 does make it easier to test and re-use in a C++ context should the need
 arise.

 '''src/lib/dhcp/iface_mgr_linux.cc''' - additional points
 open_socket() - cast should be done using C++ constructs.

 parse_rattr(): the check "<= table.size() - 1" could more easily be
 written as "< table.size()" (and saves the need to perform the subtraction
 before the test).

-- 
Ticket URL: <http://bind10.isc.org/ticket/1528#comment:9>
BIND 10 Development <http://bind10.isc.org>
BIND 10 Development