BIND 10 #2105: introduce node deleter of new RBTree

[BIND 10 Development]

#2105: introduce node deleter of new RBTree
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
                   Reporter:         |                 Owner:  vorner
  jinmei                             |                Status:  reviewing
                       Type:  task   |             Milestone:
                   Priority:         |  Sprint-20120807
  medium                             |            Resolution:
                  Component:  data   |             Sensitive:  0
  source                             |           Sub-Project:  DNS
                   Keywords:         |  Estimated Difficulty:  4
            Defect Severity:  N/A    |           Total Hours:  0
Feature Depending on Ticket:         |
  scalable inmemory                  |
        Add Hours to Ticket:  0      |
                  Internal?:  0      |
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Changes (by muks):

 * owner:  muks => vorner


Comment:

 Hi vorner

 Replying to [comment:18 vorner]:
 > > Isn't it better to send it as an argument to `operator()` ?
 >
 > I don't know. I think that's just matter of personal preference.

 I've passed it as an argument to `operator()` so that the deleter object
 is otherwise unused and const.

 >
 > Replying to [comment:16 muks]:
 > > Also `mem_sgmt` is not available in `DomainTreeNode`, so that'll be a
 problem in `setData()` if we want to destroy the old data. We'll have to
 pass it to `setData()`.
 >
 > Yes, of course, that would be needed too. But I think it is OK, because
 whoever calls setData, has the segment too, because they allocated the
 data.

 Done. :)

 > Replying to [comment:17 muks]:
 > > Also merged `nodeFission()` changes from #2054.
 >
 > They are reviewed there, right? I don't need to review them again.

 Cool.. I was just letting you know of the change.

 >
 > > Let me know your opinion on the other points.
 >
 > Which points? About the segment ↑?

 It was about the segment. I'm passing it back to you for review.

-- 
Ticket URL: <http://bind10.isc.org/ticket/2105#comment:20>
BIND 10 Development <http://bind10.isc.org>
BIND 10 Development