On Feb 21, 2014, at 7:22 PM, Evan Huus <[email protected]> wrote: > On Fri, Feb 21, 2014 at 7:13 PM, Hadriel Kaplan > <[email protected]> wrote: > >> The few such duplicates I checked basically used the FT_NONE field for a >> tree item; while the "real" ftype field was used for actual data. (if I >> recall correctly) > > That's not strictly wrong, just unnecessary. The subtree item can just > be text, as long as the actual data item is still added to be > filterable.
I inferred that he was talking about a dissector that had two entries for "foo.bar", one of which was an FT_NONE used for a tree item and one of which was a value for actual data. I think having a "foo.bar" item under a "foo.bar" item makes no sense; "foo.bar.bletch" and "foo.bar.mumble" as two components underneath "foo.bar" makes sense, but not "foo.bar" under "foo.bar". ___________________________________________________________________________ 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
