On Thu, 2002-02-28 at 17:18, Guy Harris wrote: > On Thu, Feb 28, 2002 at 09:59:40AM -0500, packet steve wrote: > > doc/README.developer mentions proto_tree_set_text and > > proto_tree_append_text. Should these be marked obsolete > > No, they shouldn't. > > As you can no longer create a protocol tree item with no text - because > if you do, and fill in the text as you dissect stuff, if you throw an > exception you can end up with a protocol tree item with no text, which > looks bogus - "proto_tree_set_text()" might not be useful (although it's > still being used).
But, you can create a proto_item that uses its default representation. It contains no "overriding representation", by which I mean a representation different than what was registered for that header_field_info*. This default representation might be adequate even if an exception is thrown. But if further dissection happens, a *better* representation can bet set via proto_item_set_text(). In work that I'm currently doing on the NCP dissector, I might even take this approach. I'm using the ptvcursor routines to add proto_item's to the proto_tree, but I need to retrieve the value of a proto_item that was added and format the value into a date or timestamp and then re-set the representation of the proto_item. --gilbert
