Sometimes I just can't quite get my head out of the box through the
very obvious opening :) Thanks for reminding me Guy.
Ed
On Thu, 10 May 2001, Guy Harris wrote:
> > Which leads me to believe that I can use the FIELDBASE and a mask
> > to extract my boolean from some appropriately sized unsigned int type.
> > It fails however to indicate which FIELDBASE values correspond
> > to which bitwidths.
>
> None of them do.
>
> Some FIELDBASE values may happen to have the same binary representation
> as some bitwidth values, but that's a different matter; that doesn't
> mean there's any way in which a given FIELDBASE value corresponds to a
> bitwidth value with the same binary representation, e.g. BASE_BIN
> doesn't correspond to a bitwidth value of 4, they just happen to both be
> represented as 00000000000000000000000000000100.
>
> "display" is an "int", and can have values, on most if not all of the
> platforms on which Ethereal runs, ranging between -2147483648 and
> 2147483647.
>
> If the field is an FT_INTn or FT_UINTn field, the value of "display" can
> be either 1 for BASE_DEC, 2 for BASE_HEX, 3 for BASE_OCT, or 4 for
> BASE_BIN (although BASE_BIN isn't actually implemented as "binary" as in
> "17 is represented as 00010001 if it's an FT_UINT8", so it's not
> currently useful).
>
> If the field is an FT_BOOLEAN and it's a bitfield, the value of
> "display" can be 8, 16, 24, or 32 (and possibly other values in between
> 1 and 32).
>
