ok, my bad. I haven't read proto_tree_get_parent() documentation and was guessing - erroneously - that it was returning a tree ... because a parent of a tree should be a tree and not an item (in the case, one day someone would like to have an API which differentiates proto_item from proto_tree).
Regards, Sebastien Tandel On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 10:28, [email protected] <[email protected]>wrote: > Sébastien Tandel wrote: > > I'm not sure it's really safe and cleaner since it's > > working only because proto_item = proto_tree = > proto_node > ... > > On Mon, Mar 23, 2009 at 18:48, Luca Ceresoli > > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > my_tree = ptvcursor_add_text_with_subtree(cursor, > ..,"foo"); > > > my_item = proto_tree_get_parent(my_tree); > > > /* ... */ > > > proto_item_set_text(my_item, "<%s>", my_string); > > Not sure I got your point. > In proto.h, proto_tree_get_parent() is declared as taking a > proto_tree* and returning a proto_item*, so I interpret it > this way: > proto_tree* X -> proto_item* Y -> proto_tree* Z > then proto_tree_get_parent(Z) returns Y. > Where am I wrong? > > Of course I am speaking from the "theoretical" and > future-compatible POV. > In the current practice the implementation of > proto_tree_get_parent() is pretty eloquent. > > Luca > > ___________________________________________________________________________ > Sent via: Wireshark-dev mailing list <[email protected]> > Archives: http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev > Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev > mailto:[email protected]?subject=unsubscribe > >
___________________________________________________________________________ Sent via: Wireshark-dev mailing list <[email protected]> Archives: http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev mailto:[email protected]?subject=unsubscribe
