Re: Reverting proto_tree_reset()

[Anders Broman <anders.broman () ericsson com>]

> Troubles getting old patch applied are not a problem.
>
> It's just current version of
>  epan_dissect_reset() is like epan_dissect_clear() and
>  proto_tree_reset() is like proto_tree_clear()
>  from https://bugs.wireshark.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=1178
>
>  which I'm going to revert (so right now part of this bug is fixed)
>
> Primary question is why this patch was put in BTS, bug report is not very descriptive.
>
> If it's for optimization than my quick benchmarks shows it's not worthy.
> If for something else or you have other data, please share.

All information I got is in the Bug report, i.e virtually nothing :-)
It was part of a set of optimizations so I guess that was the intent.
So closing it is porobably the right thing to do.
Regards
Anders

___________________________________________________________________________
Sent via:    Wireshark-dev mailing list <wireshark-dev () wireshark org>
Archives:    http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev
Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev
             mailto:wireshark-dev-request () wireshark org?subject=unsubscribe
___________________________________________________________________________
Sent via:    Wireshark-dev mailing list <wireshark-dev () wireshark org>
Archives:    http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev
Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev
             mailto:wireshark-dev-request () wireshark org?subject=unsubscribe