Re: Warning on useless extended value strings?

[Evan Huus <eapache () gmail com>]

Done in r48415. Now we wait...

On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 5:47 AM, Pascal Quantin
<pascal.quantin () gmail com> wrote:
> 2013/3/19 Evan Huus <eapache () gmail com>
> > Would anyone object to a g_warning if an extended value string has to
> > fall back to linear search? It probably indicates either a typo in the
> > value-string or somebody not understanding how extended value strings
> > work.
> >
> > Didn't want to put this in without asking because if there is a reason
> > I'm not aware of it would cause a ton of fuzz failures.
> >
> > Evan
> >
> > P.S. I thought of this while digging around thinking about
> > https://bugs.wireshark.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=8467 - I'm still
> > technically waiting for the original reporter to ACK it, but if anyone
> > else has feedback it would be appreciated.
>
>
> Hi Evan,
>
> +1 on my side. It would allow to clean the tables.
>
> Pascal.
>
> ___________________________________________________________________________
> 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