Wireshark-dev: Re: [Wireshark-dev] proto_tree_add_subtree[_format]
Date Index · Thread Index · Other Months · All Mailing Lists
Date Prev · Date Next · Thread Prev · Thread Next
From: Evan Huus <eapache@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 9 Jul 2014 23:29:30 -0400
On Wed, Jul 9, 2014 at 10:06 PM, <mmann78@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I finished the conversion of proto_tree_add_text calls that were acting as "subtree labels" into proto_tree_add_subtree[_format].  This removed almost 4000 calls in the dissector directory (over 4000 if you include the plugins) and brings the current total proto_tree_add_text count in the dissector directory to 5831 (6586 over entire wireshark master trunk).  Of the 5831, checkAPIs.pl considers 4690 to be "useless". (I believe the criteria being using printf style arguments and no return value (like when it's intended as a subtree label)).

What about the last ~1000 "not useless" ones? How are they used?
 
Since "subtree label" is the last "legimate" reason to use proto_tree_add_text, should it be added as a "soft-deprecated API" to checkAPIs script?

If there really are no remaining legitimate uses, then +1.
 
I wasn't sure if that was just being too obnoxious at the moment.  It may need its own "paragraph" with suggestions on what to use instead (make field filterable, expert info, subtree label)

Obnoxious would be hard-deprecated :)

How many actual c-files are those remaining add_text elements in? I imagine the majority of dissectors are now completely "clean" so it wouldn't be too bad.