On Wed, Aug 22, 2007 at 03:39:24PM -0400, Maynard, Chris wrote:
> I was looking at the display filter fields recently and noticed that
> there seem to be some display filter field naming mistakes/typos.
> Basically, there are a lot of naming inconsistencies, and in at least
> one case, no name at all. Here are a just a few of the dissectors
> that seem affected:
> There are a lot more, but for brevity, I haven't listed them all here.
> Is reporting this on the developer's list sufficient, or should I open
> a bug for all/some of them?
Thanks for you report! Please submit a bug report with the examples you
listed in this e-mail (no sense in wasting your time going through to
find all of them). Hopefully someone will find the time to then start
cleaning these up :)
> Perhaps there should be a more strict naming convention? Is there a
> way to automate the names so typos, missing fields, etc. can be
> avoided?
Interesting idea. I am all for making a template to help developers
pick field names (it can be tricky when you have a lot in a single
dissector).
Steve