https://bugs.wireshark.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2902
--- Comment #13 from Jaap Keuter <jaap.keuter@xxxxxxxxx> 2009-01-15 08:47:02 PDT ---
(In reply to comment #12)
> (In reply to comment #11)
> > Why not put the check into the API?
>
> Yes it's an option.
>
> But:
> - by moving check_col inside col_xxx functions there's a small semantic change.
> something like:
> if (check_col(...) {
> while(foo) {
> col_append_xxx(....),
> if (bar) col_set_writable(..., FALSE);
> ...
> }
> }
> is currently possible.
Yes, but is that actually used? And even when it is, it should be easily fixed.
> - if we clean up the code, it could make backporting patches to the 1.0 branch
> harder.
I would not like backporting issues holding us back from development of our
APIs. And even then, when adding this check into the API we can leave the
existing dissector code 'as is', and recommend this only for new code.
That saves us clean up work (we just don't do that) and we keep easier
backportable code. In short: Work less, gain more :)
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugs.wireshark.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug.