On Fri, Oct 11, 2013 at 9:22 AM, Jeff Morriss <[email protected]> wrote: > On 10/10/13 18:22, Evan Huus wrote: >> >> It might be simpler and almost as efficient to have >> recently-successful heuristic dissectors bubble nearer to the top of >> the list so they are tried sooner. Port/conversation lookups are >> hash-tables for the most part and likely won't be made noticeably >> faster by caching. > > > Wouldn't that expose us to the risk that the dissection actually changes on > the 2nd pass (because the call order of the heuristics changes)? That would > look pretty weird...
Only if two heuristics match the same packet, which is, theoretically, a bug since they can't both be right. ___________________________________________________________________________ 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
