Subject: [manet] #49 (aodvv2): Locating pseudocode in appendix (submitted for Chris Dearlove)

From: "manet issue tracker" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 21 Jul 2014 03:47:42 -0000

#49: Locating pseudocode in appendix (submitted for Chris Dearlove)

 Appendix A. If pseudo-code is needed to explain the algorithms, it
 needs to be in the main body. If the main body is considered complete
 (and this is at the detail level I've not read) I'm not sure exactly
 what this is offering. I's also too C-like (NULL for example) while
 not being C (use of := - although not fully consistently). I don't
 think the balance is right here.

-- 
-----------------------------------+-----------------------------------
 Reporter:  [email-masked]  |      Owner:  [email-masked]
     Type:  defect                 |     Status:  new
 Priority:  minor                  |  Milestone:
Component:  aodvv2                 |    Version:
 Severity:  Active WG Document     |   Keywords:  Algorithm pseudocode
-----------------------------------+-----------------------------------

Ticket URL: <https://tools.ietf.org/wg/manet/trac/ticket/49>
manet <http://tools.ietf.org/manet/>

---

From: "Charles E. Perkins" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 20 Jul 2014 21:54:44 -0700

Hello Chris,

Appendix A was developed in response to issue #23.  It is intended to
assist with code development.  The main body is intended to contain the
complete specification, and the appendix is intended to offer another way
of guiding the development of the code.  The explanation of the protocol
in the main body should not only provide the mandates and options, but
also provide the explanation and understanding for the inclusion of the
protocol features.

Appendix A is certainly not intended to be confused with compilable code.
I used various syntactic devices that I have seen elsewhere in many places;
terminology like "NULL" and ":=" is pretty unambiguous. Nevertheless,
I am definitely open to suggestion.  What are your preferences?

I don't yet understand the manner in which the algorithms are not
balanced.  However, this appendix has been undergoing many changes
during the last several weeks, and I expect that there will be more
corrections and improvements.

-- 
Regards,
Charlie P.