[openbeosnetteam] Re: MBuf

> > This is an old school implementation (when ANSI C ruled), if you had to
> > reimplement it from scratch, you'd probably want to do it in a more OO
> > way.
>
> An C++ mbuf implementation, MBuf class:
> http://rbmake.sourceforge.net/lib-mbuf.html

I read this already, but I do not really like it because it's still mbuf. ;)

> Feel free to expand on what you have in mind for "a more OO way" to
implement
> net buffer support.

I will use mbufs in the first implementation. Later, we will need a new
stack, anyway, so I will change PPP to use a OO version of our net_data or
even net_data itself. Maybe the OO version would be better because it is the
only module that must be proted to make PPP and all other modules portable?

> I'm not totally please with my net_data idea (cloning bone_data support),
and
> every suggestion about building a better NetData class or whatever is
welcomed.

I will think about it after I used mbufs. ;)
Then, I will (hopefully) know what must be changed.

Waldemar

Other related posts: