Wireshark mailing list archives
Re: Wireshark coding style help
From: Bill Meier <wmeier () newsguy com>
Date: Fri, 22 Nov 2013 14:33:55 -0500
On 11/21/2013 8:05 PM, Guy Harris wrote:
On Nov 21, 2013, at 4:37 PM, Michael Lum <michael.lum () starsolutions com> wrote:Can someone tell me why code like this: i++; would have been changed to this: i += 1; ?If the code in question is stepping through a packet, and "i" is actually "offset" or some such variable holding the offset into the packet, and other code is doing "offset += 2" or "offset += 4", people might have used "offset += 1" to make the style more consistent and to put the field length into all the incrementing lines of code.
You may be referring to one or more changes I made. :)As Guy suggested, for consistency I tend to change 'offset++' to 'offset += 1'.
It does appear that I changed 'i++;' to 'i += 1;' in a few instances.I must have been a bit over enthusiastic in those cases since there's no real reason for that change.
Bill ___________________________________________________________________________ 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
Current thread:
- Wireshark coding style help Michael Lum (Nov 21)
- Re: Wireshark coding style help Guy Harris (Nov 21)
- Re: Wireshark coding style help Bill Meier (Nov 22)
- Re: Wireshark coding style help Michael Lum (Nov 22)
- Re: Wireshark coding style help Bill Meier (Nov 22)
- Re: Wireshark coding style help Guy Harris (Nov 21)