Re: [Ethereal-dev] (no subject)

["packet steve" <packetsteve@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

I later noticed that Michael Lum's ranap patch slightly overlaps mine.  Next 
time I'll diff versus current cvs.

You're probably right about ranap.ie.number_of_ProtocolExtensionFields.  If 
there are no contrary opinions, we can use 
ranap.number_of_ProtocolExtensionFields (easier to type).

Crashing in the registration code would keep the code cleaner.


> From: Guy Harris <guy@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> To: packet steve <packetsteve@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> CC: ethereal-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [Ethereal-dev] (no subject)
> Date: Mon, 6 Oct 2003 01:38:53 -0700
>
> On Sun, Oct 05, 2003 at 10:12:27AM -0400, packet steve wrote:
> > When writing proto_register_xx, its easy to create unintended 
> duplicates.
> >
> > I've attached patches against 0.9.15 for
> > packet-dcerpc-rpriv.c
> > packet-dcerpc-spoolss.c
> > packet-isup.c
> > packet-nlsp.c
> > packet-ranap.c
> > packet-sua.c
> > to remove the exact duplicates I noticed.  Please consider these 
> patches.
>
> Checked in (although some of the RANAP patches don't apply to the
> current version, and it looked offhand as if the "numer of protocol
> extensions field" one should have deleted
> "ranap.ie.number_of_ProtocolExtensionFields" rather than
> "ranap.number_of_ProtocolExtensionFields" - if that's not the case, let
> me know).
>
> Arguably, the registration code should crash if the hf_ variable being
> initialized isn't -1, although in the dissectors where they aren't
> variables but are members of an array, they might not be initialized to
> -1, so that'd need to be fixed, or we'd need to allow 0 or -1; the
> latter would probably be sufficient to catch most if not all of these bugs.

_________________________________________________________________
Get MSN 8 Dial-up Internet Service FREE for one month.  Limited time offer-- 
sign up now!   http://join.msn.com/?page=dept/dialup