Wireshark mailing list archives
Re: VALS() with populated "unknown string"
From: mmann78 () netscape net
Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2013 17:48:28 -0400 (EDT)
No, the issue is a dissector wants to use "reserved" or "Unknown <field name>", etc instead of the strict "Unknown". Providing the numeric value that accompanies that enumeration is almost secondary. I think Jakub's idea is a good one, just didn't know if we wanted to convert all (most) value_strings to value_strings_ext. I thought the value_string_ext was more for a "large number of value strings", which won't always be the case. But extending it with another value could allow us to put another string in for the "unknown". -----Original Message----- From: Jeff Morriss <jeff.morriss.ws () gmail com> To: Developer support list for Wireshark <wireshark-dev () wireshark org> Sent: Mon, Sep 16, 2013 3:16 pm Subject: Re: [Wireshark-dev] VALS() with populated "unknown string" On 09/16/13 06:49, mmann78 () netscape net wrote:
Is there a way to provide the "unknown string" for the val_to_str call made in hf_ registration (ie some derivation of the VALS() macro)? There are many proto_tree_add_[u]int_format[_value] calls that are done strictly to provided an "unknown string" for the val_to_str that is different than the default of "Unknown". If there was such a way, many of these calls could be converted to proto_tree_add_item or proto_tree_add_[u]int. If there isn't such a thing, how easy/hard would it be to implement?
Would most if not all of those be satisfied by changing the current "Unknown" string to "Unknown %d" or "Unknown 0x%x" (depending on the hf's BASE_)? Should we be doing that by default anyway? (That would mean we'd end up using a lot more ep_ memory for the formatted string, but I'm not sure that's so bad.) Another way I've seen this done is to append (proto_item_append_text()) the (custom) "unknown string" after the item is added. ___________________________________________________________________________ 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
Current thread:
- VALS() with populated "unknown string" mmann78 (Sep 16)
- Re: VALS() with populated "unknown string" Jakub Zawadzki (Sep 16)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- VALS() with populated "unknown string" mmann78 (Sep 16)
- Re: VALS() with populated "unknown string" Jeff Morriss (Sep 16)
- Re: VALS() with populated "unknown string" mmann78 (Sep 16)
- Re: VALS() with populated "unknown string" Alexis La Goutte (Sep 17)