Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 07 Jun 2011 14:18:06 -0700
From:      Doug Barton <dougb@FreeBSD.org>
To:        Hiroki Sato <hrs@FreeBSD.org>
Cc:        bz@FreeBSD.org, freebsd-rc@FreeBSD.org
Subject:   Re: afexists()
Message-ID:  <4DEE958E.2000405@FreeBSD.org>
In-Reply-To: <20110602.111753.392307987943310561.hrs@allbsd.org>
References:  <4DE588B4.7090908@FreeBSD.org>	<20110601.130434.820821962809263631.hrs@allbsd.org>	<4DE6D3C8.1050503@FreeBSD.org> <20110602.111753.392307987943310561.hrs@allbsd.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 06/01/2011 19:17, Hiroki Sato wrote:
> Doug Barton<dougb@FreeBSD.org>  wrote
>    in<4DE6D3C8.1050503@FreeBSD.org>:
>
> do>  On 05/31/2011 21:04, Hiroki Sato wrote:
> do>  >    I think it would be great if it is possible to create a wrapper
> do>  >    function for testing and caching.  I expects testing kern.features.*
> do>  >    is likely added again to somewhere in rc.d scripts, and adding a long
> do>  >    lines of "[ -n ... ]&&   return 0; if sysctl...; fi" each time
> do>  >    degrades readability.
> do>
> do>  I think that's definitely an interesting idea, and I'd love to review
> do>  patches that implement it. :) Unfortunately I don't have time to do so
> do>  atm, and would prefer to focus on a specific case where a small
> do>  optimization leads to a big gain.
>
>   A patch is attached.

That's Ok as far as it goes, but what I thought you meant was something 
a little more general for sysctl-related things. However since this has 
most of the benefits of what I proposed, I don't object. My only request 
is that you get either your patch or mine in sooner rather than later. :)


Doug

-- 

	Nothin' ever doesn't change, but nothin' changes much.
			-- OK Go

	Breadth of IT experience, and depth of knowledge in the DNS.
	Yours for the right price.  :)  http://SupersetSolutions.com/




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4DEE958E.2000405>