Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

generic PR followups #68

Open
2 of 12 tasks
adisos opened this issue Sep 29, 2024 · 3 comments
Open
2 of 12 tasks

generic PR followups #68

adisos opened this issue Sep 29, 2024 · 3 comments

Comments

@adisos
Copy link
Contributor

adisos commented Sep 29, 2024

items to complete before release:

  • new ICMP type not restricted only to RFC combinations
  • Consider pkg reorg: Should keep both netset.TransportSet and connection.Set ? (also confusing with netset.ConnectionSet) -- remove connection.Set , consider renaming netset.ConnectionSet.

additional items:

  • Remove unused code in package netp
  • Keep or remove unused rightTripleSet and outerTripleSet?
  • Add NumPartitions interface method to TripleSet?
  • Validation of types ranges (ports, icmp properties, etc), error handling
  • Define type TripleDisjoint for supporting other protocol numbers in connection set?
  • Revisit string() functions for the various types in package netset
  • More tests for extended connection set
  • Document example objects, operations, etc , better documentation for packages , readme with examples , internal representation impact
  • type definitions: can LeftTripleSet be defined as type LeftTripleSet[S1 Set[S1], S2 Set[S2], S3 Set[S3]] Product[Product[S1, S2], S3] (instead of new struct with one member)?
  • check tests coverage, add relevant tests
@elazarg
Copy link
Member

elazarg commented Sep 29, 2024

I think we should consider

  • making the interval type generic.
  • having a dedicated "small set" abstraction, something that fits the protocol type more tightly.

@adisos
Copy link
Contributor Author

adisos commented Sep 30, 2024

I think we should consider

* [ ]  making the interval type generic.

* [ ]  having a dedicated "small set" abstraction, something that fits the protocol type more tightly.

Thanks @elazarg
Can you elaborate what you meant with having a dedicated "small set" abstraction?

@elazarg
Copy link
Member

elazarg commented Sep 30, 2024

I mean a set for two values (e.g. for TCP/UDP), or more generally a set for K values, which is more difficult to encode into golang's type system.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants