Wireshark mailing list archives

Re: Remove hf_ variables


From: Evan Huus <eapache () gmail com>
Date: Mon, 29 Jul 2013 16:19:27 -0400

Does this mean that all proto_tree_add_* calls would need to have
&hf_name instead of just hf_name?

I'm not attached to them in principle (and getting rid of them seems
like it would be a performance/memory win) but your description is
awfully vague...

On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 4:12 PM, Jakub Zawadzki
<darkjames-ws () darkjames pl> wrote:
Hi,

Is anyone attached to hf_ variables? ;)

There's no real need of them, and we can just replace them with
header_field_info structure.
___________________________________________________________________________
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: