Wireshark-dev: Re: [Wireshark-dev] [Wireshark-commits] rev 36772: /trunk/plugins/profinet/ /tru
Date Index · Thread Index · Other Months · All Mailing Lists
Date Prev · Date Next · Thread Prev · Thread Next
From: Jeff Morriss <jeff.morriss.ws@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2011 17:32:55 -0400
Stig Bjørlykke wrote:

On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 10:31 PM, Alexis La Goutte
<alexis.lagoutte@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

I based my change on the previous revision of jmayer (rev36724) in this file
and there is the same mistake !


Hmm, after a closer look I find that proto_item_add_subtree() returns
the input parameter, so we have no real bug here.

But this raises a question why we have to use the return value from
proto_item_add_subtree() for the tree, as proto_item and proto_tree
are the same...  I think the cleanest solution is to use the return
value, as this is done elsewhere and the implementation of
proto_item_add_subtree() may change.  Comments?
Isn't the theory that, while proto_item is currently the same as proto_tree, that could eventually (need to) change?