Anders Broman wrote: > Hi, > I have no problem with backing out my changes but a > Proto_... function should not be local to iuup in my opinion. > Perhaps it should be renamed iuup_proto_.. instead until > We have "the real thing" in proto.c > > What do others think? > Well, first of all, we shouldn't have a buildbot going into deep red for a long time, so there's something to be done.
I'll fully agree that a function starting with proto_ shouldn't be in any dissector code - a name clash will be the result sooner or later - and today is sooner ;-) Could you please: 1.) fix the issue in iuup by prepending iuup_ so the buildbot get's green again - I'm currently waiting for it :-( 2.) if your new function doesn't follow the common function pattern, fix this issue in your implementation (I didn't had a look at the code in proto myself) 3.) change iuup to use the new function in proto.h (probably has to be done by someone else than you) Regards, ULFL _______________________________________________ Wireshark-dev mailing list Wireshark-dev@wireshark.org http://www.wireshark.org/mailman/listinfo/wireshark-dev
