[Martin Mathieson <martin.r.mathieson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Reverted now.

On Wed, Sep 19, 2012 at 9:34 AM, Martin Mathieson <martin.r.mathieson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Hi,

Sorry about that.  I had no idea that the old function could change the value behind a filter - should have been more careful (especially when I noticed that packet-frame.c was also using it...).

Maybe I could create and use a new function such as proto_item_append_literal_text()

I will be going out very soon, so won't be able to revert it for the next few hours, obviously I don't mind if someone does before I get back.

Regards,

Martin

On Wed, Sep 19, 2012 at 8:31 AM, Jakub Zawadzki <darkjames-ws@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Hi,

I'm looking for r45005 changes and it seems than new proto_item_append_string()
works different than previously.

Old code was changing value of field [both for text and filter],
new version changes only text (so it do the same as proto_item_append_text())

What's the reason of this change? Actually I'm afraid I know.
You want to avoid string formating penatly of proto_item_append_text().

But your changes is breaking current use, like filtering for frame.protocols == "XXXX"

Regards,
 Jakub.
___________________________________________________________________________
Sent via:    Wireshark-dev mailing list <wireshark-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Archives:    http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev
Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev
             mailto:wireshark-dev-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe