Re: Retrieving dissection result from another dissector

[Anders Broman <a.broman58 () gmail com>]

Den tis 3 juli 2018 21:28Guy Harris <guy () alum mit edu> skrev:

> On Jul 3, 2018, at 12:01 PM, Pascal Quantin <pascal.quantin () gmail com>
> wrote:
>
> > As the scope is an explicit argument, I find it quite clear what's going
> on already.
>
> As the two functions are quite different in intent, I find it not entirely
> clear, merely from the scope, what's going on.
>
> > Personally I do not think a new function is required (the add/get/remove
> being what they mean), and they are here since a long time so it would
> change existing habits.
>
> I'd like to change habits so that people think of "persistent per-packet
> data" and "per-dissection data" very differently.

I think I crated the original function and I think it has been misused and
agree with Guy on this one. The key argument was meant to be the protocol
level so that a protocol that got called several times in a packet could
retrieve the right data, nothing else.

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