Wireshark-dev: Re: [Wireshark-dev] Replace TRUE/FALSE with proper ENC_* in proto_tree_add_item(
From: Bill Meier <wmeier@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2011 14:44:23 -0400
On 10/4/2011 2:45 PM, Guy Harris wrote:

... FT_STRING, FT_STRINGZ, and FT_UINT_STRING, for which an
encoding should also be supplied.

The endianness is irrelevant for ENC_UTF_8, ENC_ASCII, and
ENC_EBCDIC.


> In the future, there will be ENC_UTF_16 and possibly ENC_UCS_2, for
> which the endianness will be relevant.
>
> Should we always specify an endianness for strings, or only for those
> character encodings where it's relevant?

For FT_STRING..., rather than cluttering up the encoding arg with ENC_NA, I would be sightly inclined to specify endianness only where relevant.

For FT_UINT_STRING obviously ENC_[BIG|LITTLE]_... would be needed for all.

However, I can understand the approach of always specifying an endianness to be consistent with other usage. After all, we're already using ENC_NA for FT_BYTES, FT_NONE & etc.

Thoughts ?

-------

In any case, no matter what is decided, changes will be needed for FT_STRING & etc.

Is it OK to just change all the instances with no character encoding to ENC_ASCII (with or without ENC_NA) ?

Currently: the encoding arg instance count for proto_tree_add_item() calls in epan/dissectors is as follows:


FT_STRING/FT_STRINGZ:
   593 FALSE
   124 TRUE
    38 0

   394 ENC_BIG_ENDIAN
   105 ENC_LITTLE_ENDIAN
    85 ENC_NA

    17 ENC_ASCII|ENC_BIG_ENDIAN
     1 ENC_ASCII|ENC_LITTLE_ENDIAN

    25 ENC_UTF_8|ENC_BIG_ENDIAN
    14 ENC_UTF_8|ENC_LITTLE_ENDIAN
     2 ENC_UTF_8|ENC_NA
     1 ENC_UTF_8

    29 ENC_EBCDIC|ENC_NA


FT_UINT_STRING (9 or so files):
     36 ENC_BIG_ENDIAN
     14 ENC_LITTLE_ENDIAN
     10 ENC_UTF_8|ENC_BIG_ENDIAN