On Jul 16, 2012, at 7:18 AM, Richard Sharpe wrote:
> We can do the parsing any way we want. However, it seems that we do
> not need LLVM if we are just producing dissectors as C code. We would
> only need it if we want to compile all the way into some sort of byte
> code for dissectors.
$ gcc
-bash: gcc: command not found
$ clang
-bash: clang: command not found
$ cc
-bash: cc: command not found
...
Obviously not my machine, which *does* have gcc and clang installed, and in
which cc is a link to gcc, but if somebody's not interested in writing C code
but *is* interested in adding a new protocol to Wireshark, and doesn't have a C
compiler installed, either translating to an interpreted bytecode or to, for
example, LLVM language:
http://llvm.org/docs/LangRef.html
and JITting it into your machine code, could be useful.
> However, AFAIK, there is no such dissector VM today. There is a VM for
> filtering, but not for dissection.
There isn't, but perhaps there should be.
___________________________________________________________________________
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-requ...@wireshark.org?subject=unsubscribe
