Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 16 Apr 2004 16:59:32 +0200
From:      des@des.no (=?iso-8859-1?q?Dag-Erling_Sm=F8rgrav?=)
To:        Luigi Rizzo <luigi@FreeBSD.org>
Cc:        cvs-all@FreeBSD.org
Subject:   Re: cvs commit: src/sys/net if.c route.c rtsock.c
Message-ID:  <xzpad1c7yuj.fsf@dwp.des.no>
In-Reply-To: <20040416040536.A22418@xorpc.icir.org> (Luigi Rizzo's message of "Fri, 16 Apr 2004 04:05:36 -0700")
References:  <200404160814.i3G8EYpj071288@repoman.freebsd.org> <20040416090520.GA1194@FreeBSD.org> <20040416023457.A12665@xorpc.icir.org> <xzpisg08a7g.fsf@dwp.des.no> <20040416040536.A22418@xorpc.icir.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Luigi Rizzo <luigi@FreeBSD.org> writes:
> On Fri, Apr 16, 2004 at 12:54:11PM +0200, Dag-Erling Sm=F8rgrav wrote:
> > Luigi Rizzo <luigi@FreeBSD.org> writes:
> > > ifaddr_byindex() is already a macro, so i'd rather not have the
> > > double indirection.
> > What difference does it make?
> it is two different ways of getting the same info, which is
> precisely what i was trying to remove in the first place.

No, my question was: what difference does an extra level of
indirection make?  It is resolved at compile time, so there is no
run-time overhead.  If it makes the code simpler and more obvious,
it's a good thing.

DES
--=20
Dag-Erling Sm=F8rgrav - des@des.no



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?xzpad1c7yuj.fsf>