On 04/26/2010 07:01 PM, Eric Blossom wrote: > On Mon, Apr 26, 2010 at 03:26:46PM -0700, Matt Ettus wrote: > >> On 04/26/2010 03:19 PM, Marcus D. Leech wrote: >> >>> Optional fields, optional packing formats. Rather a nightmare. Doing a >>> Wireshark parser is going to >>> be just so much fun :-) >>> >> >> We use a very well defined subset of VRT which makes parsing a lot >> easier. We don't use class fields, for example. >> >> Matt >> > FWIW, the code that's already written handles all of the cases > consistently. It wasn't a big deal. There's a finite set of stuff > and there's some machine generated code that handles all the optionally > there/not-there cases. > > Eric > > > Well, perhaps I should look at that code as a dissector core for Wireshark, then.
Does it handle the lovely "optimized for wire-format-density vs optimized-for-machine-processing" wire-format variabilities? -- Marcus Leech Principal Investigator Shirleys Bay Radio Astronomy Consortium http://www.sbrac.org _______________________________________________ Discuss-gnuradio mailing list Discuss-gnuradio@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss-gnuradio
