On Wed, Sep 02, 2009 at 09:09:36PM +0200, Kovarththanan Rajaratnam wrote:
> > It's a trade off, the idea being that by keeping the entire list the list
> > does not have to be recreated at refiltering. With the new packet list the
> > cost of adding a packet is low.
>
> I think the point Joerg was trying to make is that the packet list view
> (not the underlying packet list store) is updated even when no packets
> are added to it. Am I correct Joerg?
Yes, it's only about the view.
Thanks
Joerg
--
Joerg Mayer <[email protected]>
We are stuck with technology when what we really want is just stuff that
works. Some say that should read Microsoft instead of technology.
___________________________________________________________________________
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
