On Fri, May 26, 2000 at 07:16:17PM -0600, Warren Young wrote:
> Here's an idea: do a simple string match. I'd use this mostly for the
> "Data" item in the tree, so store that string when I click on that item
> in the tree. Then when I click the next packet (or hit the down arrow
> or whatever) it searches for an item in the protocol tree with that
> name; no match, no selection.
A simple string match isn't enough for that - it'd have to extract the
name from the string, and leave out any "(N bytes)".
It'd probably actually be *easier* to arrange that all "Data" fields
have a field explicitly associated with them, and select the first entry
in the new packet that has that field associated with it, if any.
> > Furthermore, if the line selected is assciated with a filterable field,
> > and there's only one instance of that field in both packets' protocol
> > trees, the problem is trivial - select the one-and-only entry
> > corresponding to that field in the new packet's protocol tree.
>
> I think you're trying for the "perfect" solution when "good enough" ...
> is.
In the stuff following the paragraph you quote, I suggest something
that is a "good enough", rather than a "perfect", solution, which is to
select the first entry in the new tree that's associated with the same
field as the current entry in the old tree.
That, plus arranging that "Data (N bytes)", would handle the case of the
"Data" item.
