[Ulf Lamping <ulf.lamping@xxxxxx>]

Maynard, Chris wrote:

> Since the "ephemeral" names are transitional only, I don't think it
> matters too much, since eventually they will be renamed back to their
> originals without the "ephemeral" designation anyway.  Or has that idea
> changed?
>  
As far as I understood Ronnie, this will be the permanent names in the 
"future".

> The only other comment I would like to make is that if we do end up with
> a 2nd set of functions designed to malloc() memory for the string (or
> whatever the case may be), that the names are much more explicit.  For
> example, I personally think that something like
> tvb_get_malloced_string(), or perhaps even more simply
> tvb_malloc_string(), are much clearer names for what this function would
> do.  I think this makes things crystal clear that when this function is
> called, memory will be allocated for the string, and it will therefore
> need to be manually freed by the caller at some point.
>  
As Ronnie stated, these function would be rarely used.

In these rare cases, a separate call to g_strdup() might be a better 
idea to keep the tvb API slight and simple ...

Regards, ULFL