Re: Disabling a dissector doesn't seem to quite work.

[Guy Harris <guy () alum mit edu>]

On Sep 16, 2012, at 12:49 AM, Joerg Mayer <jmayer () loplof de> wrote:

> On Sat, Sep 15, 2012 at 03:44:59PM -0700, Guy Harris wrote:
> > > My understanding of dissectors registering to port 0 was simply a method for
> > > allowing "Decode As" to work.
> >
> > The right way for a dissector to say "I run atop {TCP,UDP,...} but I don't have a standard port number, so use 
> > "Decode As..."" is to call dissector_add() with a dissector handle and a dissector table name.
>
> As dissector_add happens to be a) used nowhere and b) #defined to dissector_add_uint,
> that may have been the case but is definitely not what today's code looks like.

Sorry, I meant "dissector_add_handle()", not "dissector_add()".

> If there's no opposition, I will remove that #define.

We might as well, unless

        1) there's a way (at least with GCC-compatible compilers) to deprecate a macro (as opposed to a function)

and

        2) we want to deprecate the old APIs for one release before removing it.
___________________________________________________________________________
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