[Guy Harris <guy@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Nov 10, 2003, at 5:42 PM, Michael Lum wrote:

> The malloc() change for the definition of ett does not appear to work.
>
> My last patch is good but the malloc/pointer stuff isn't.
>
> Ethereal will core:
>
>
> ** ERROR **: file proto.c: line 2084 (proto_item_add_subtree): 
> assertion
> failed: (idx >= 0 && idx < num_tree_types)
> aborting...
> Abort(coredump)
It doesn't do so when I start a version built on Mac OS 10.3.

Is this happening with the current CVS code, or code with some changes 
you've added?
However, when looking at the code:

	it appears, from what Albert Chin said, that what's upsetting the HP 
compiler is the "?"/":" operator;
	the only places I see that being used in *that* context are the 
definitions of MAX_NUM_DTAP_MSG and  MAX_NUM_DTAP_MSG;
	"size_t" is unsigned, so the first argument to "ANSI_A_MAX()", in both 
cases, should be >= 0 (and, in fact, as arrays can't be zero-length in 
ANSI C89, should be > 0);
so we should be able to just define MAX_NUM_DTAP_MSG as 
NUM_IOS401_DTAP_MSG, define MAX_NUM_BSMAP_MSG as NUM_IOS401_BSMAP_MSG, 
and go back to the way it was.
Is there any compelling reason to leave the "ANSI_A_MAX()" call in the 
definitions of MAX_NUM_DTAP_MSG or MAX_NUM_BSMAP_MSG?