[lwip-devel] [task #6827] etharp could need some tuning

[Kieran Mansley]

Follow-up Comment #41, task #6827 (project lwip):

I quite like your solution conceptually, but agree it does involve some
layering violations and lots of little modifications to the code, so not
easily disabled with #define.

The sorted list is cleaner, but has some bad use cases where you spend more
time sorting than you would searching.  Perhaps that's OK though.

I suppose in an ideal world we would just maintain this address hint feature
as an optional extra (as a patch) and those that are interested would apply
it, and those that weren't would stick with the current situation.  However,
maintaining patches isn't much fun (at least with CVS - with something like
mercurial it becomes much easier).



    _______________________________________________________

Reply to this item at:

  <http://savannah.nongnu.org/task/?6827>

_______________________________________________
  Message sent via/by Savannah
  http://savannah.nongnu.org/