Re: proto_tree_add_subtree[_format]

[Evan Huus <eapache () gmail com>]

On Wed, Jul 9, 2014 at 10:06 PM, <mmann78 () netscape net> wrote:

>  I finished the conversion of proto_tree_add_text calls that were acting
> as "subtree labels" into proto_tree_add_subtree[_format].  This removed
> almost 4000 calls in the dissector directory (over 4000 if you include the
> plugins) and brings the current total proto_tree_add_text count in the
> dissector directory to 5831 (6586 over entire wireshark master trunk).  Of
> the 5831, checkAPIs.pl considers 4690 to be "useless". (I believe the
> criteria being using printf style arguments and no return value (like when
> it's intended as a subtree label)).

What about the last ~1000 "not useless" ones? How are they used?


>  Since "subtree label" is the last "legimate" reason to use
> proto_tree_add_text, should it be added as a "soft-deprecated API" to
> checkAPIs script?

If there really are no remaining legitimate uses, then +1.


> I wasn't sure if that was just being too obnoxious at the moment.  It may
> need its own "paragraph" with suggestions on what to use instead (make
> field filterable, expert info, subtree label)

Obnoxious would be hard-deprecated :)

How many actual c-files are those remaining add_text elements in? I imagine
the majority of dissectors are now completely "clean" so it wouldn't be too
bad.

___________________________________________________________________________
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