Hi Chris, Please don't confuse semantics with syntaxis.
Thanks, Jaap Send from my iPhone On 29 mrt 2010, at 16:33, "Maynard, Chris" <[email protected] > wrote: > ... and if we really want to retain a function call for whatever > reason, then at the very least it should be renamed to something > like proto_tree_cast_tree_to_item() for clarity, since that's all > the function does. > > - Chris > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto:wireshark-dev- > [email protected]] On Behalf Of Maynard, Chris > Sent: Monday, March 29, 2010 10:21 AM > To: 'Developer support list for Wireshark' > Subject: Re: [Wireshark-dev] proto_tree_get_parent() > > I still don't get it. Compare proto_item_get_parent() with > proto_tree_get_parent(): > > proto_item* > proto_item_get_parent(proto_item *ti) { > if (!ti) > return (NULL); > return ti->parent; > } > > proto_item* > proto_tree_get_parent(proto_tree *tree) { > if (!tree) > return (NULL); > return (proto_item*) tree; > } > > The former returns a pointer to the parent whereas the latter simply > casts the tree to an item. If a cast is all that's needed, then > that can be very easily accomplished without a confusing and > misleading function call. > > - Chris > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto:wireshark-dev- > [email protected]] On Behalf Of Kukosa, Tomas > Sent: Monday, March 29, 2010 2:26 AM > To: Developer support list for Wireshark > Subject: Re: [Wireshark-dev] proto_tree_get_parent() > > Hi, > I guess the function works well and as expected. > It returns parent proto_item of the proto_tree and in our internal > representation the item and its subtree are the same object only > casted either to proto_item or proto_tree. > > Regards, > Tomas > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto:wireshark-dev- > [email protected]] On Behalf Of Maynard, Chris > Sent: Sunday, March 28, 2010 1:46 AM > To: 'Developer support list for Wireshark' > Subject: Re: [Wireshark-dev] proto_tree_get_parent() > > This sure looks like a bug to me. A quick search shows at least > these 18 dissectors calling it: > $ grep -l proto_tree_get_parent packet-*.c > packet-amr.c > packet-assa_r3.c > packet-dcerpc.c > packet-h264.c > packet-h450-ros.c > packet-h450.c > packet-h460.c > packet-iax2.c > packet-isakmp.c > packet-mikey.c > packet-mp4ves.c > packet-q931.c > packet-q932-ros.c > packet-qsig.c > packet-rtp.c > packet-smb2.c > packet-ssl.c > packet-tcp.c > > If things are working correctly in those dissectors, then I think > it's by pure luck and the function call can simply be omitted. > Either way, I think the function should be changed to implement what > its proto_item_get_parent() peer implements. I would suggest filing > a bug report about. > > Good catch. > - Chris > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto:wireshark-dev- > [email protected]] On Behalf Of Eloy Paris > Sent: Thursday, March 25, 2010 8:49 PM > To: Developer support list for Wireshark > Subject: [Wireshark-dev] proto_tree_get_parent() > > Is this right (from epan/proto.c): > > proto_item* > proto_tree_get_parent(proto_tree *tree) { > if (!tree) > return (NULL); > return (proto_item*) tree; > } > > This basically returns the same thing that is received as a parameter. > Shouldn't tree->parent be returned instead, just as > proto_item_get_parent() (a few lines above in the same file) does? > > The weird thing is that there is code using this seemingly broken > proto_tree_get_parent(). I don't know how things are working given > that > proto_tree_get_parent() is not really providing the parent node. > > Confused, > > Eloy Paris.- > netexpect.org > ___________________________________________________________________________ > 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 > CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: The contents of this email are confidential > and for the exclusive use of the intended recipient. If you receive > this > email in error, please delete it from your system immediately and > notify us either by email, telephone or fax. You should not copy, > forward, or otherwise disclose the content of the email. > > ___________________________________________________________________________ > 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 > CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: The contents of this email are confidential > and for the exclusive use of the intended recipient. If you receive > this > email in error, please delete it from your system immediately and > notify us either by email, telephone or fax. You should not copy, > forward, or otherwise disclose the content of the email. > > ___________________________________________________________________________ > 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 > CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: The contents of this email are confidential > and for the exclusive use of the intended recipient. If you receive > this > email in error, please delete it from your system immediately and > notify us either by email, telephone or fax. You should not copy, > forward, or otherwise disclose the content of the email. > > ___________________________________________________________________________ > 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
