clean up GCs in use around options
Nobody has claimed this yet.
- Dominant language
- C
- Stars
- 14.6k
- Forks
- 3.4k
- PR merge metrics
- No merged PRs in 30d
Description
This was prompted by #1060 and the bugfix for it - there are a number of GCs involved, one for "options" one for "dns options", and whatnot...
13:07 <@plaisthos> we seem to have that sepearete gc for pre push save and then
restore
13:07 <@plaisthos> would probably been better to have that a generic pre push
gc instead of just for dns but that is a different topic
13:10 <@plaisthos> so yeah the patch makes sense but I wish the role of the gc
would be better explained in trhe source code
13:40 <@ordex> plaisthos: that can indeed be refactored. so that GCs are not
per-coponent, but rather "per-lifecycle". but it may entail a
quite large refactoring..
... recording that discussion so we don't forget... definitely not 2.7 material.
Contributor guide
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
Research direction
Start by tracing the GCs used around “options” and “dns options”, and read the bugfix context in #1060. Done means consolidating component-specific GCs into lifecycle-oriented handling where appropriate and documenting each GC’s role in the source; the issue notes that this may require a large refactoring.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Tech stack
- c
- Domain
- networking
- Issue type
- Refactor
- Difficulty
- 4/5
- Estimated time
- 3-5 days
- Activity status
- Quiet
- Clarity
- Needs clarification
- Newbie friendliness
- 35/100