Comment # 10
on bug 9361
from Joe Huffman
(In reply to comment #9)
> The dissector looks very good except I found it odd that you "swapped" item
> and tree variable names in handle_message_header_body() (header_tree and
> header_item) and carried that through to a few other function calls.
> proto_item and proto_tree both resolve to the same type I believe, it just
> caught me a little off guard. Not really worth fixing unless you want to.
Thanks for the feedback.
I'm not going to change it unless it's required. I have to go through a lengthy
review process on my end for any changes.
Is there anything that does need to be changed? Or is it all good as far as
what I need to do?
You are receiving this mail because:
- You are watching all bug changes.