Hi, 2008/1/30, Sake Blok <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > I think the idea of a pop-up explaining the way the operator > "!=" works on fields with multiple occurences in one packet is > a good way to educate people. But only if there is an option > to "Don't show me this message again" :-)
I'll vote on this idea. But I think we really need help/manual document updated too. > Oh, we also would need to write a very nice compact, easy > to understand message. With of course a link for some more > background and examples to the Wiki. I think describing equivalent formula will do ( 4 lines? ): ip.addr == a ≡ ( ip.src == a )||( ip.dst == a ) ip.addr != a ≡ ( ip.src != a )||( ip.dst != a ) !( ip.addr == a ) ≡ ( ip.src != a )&&( ip.dst != a ) !( ip.addr != a ) ≡ ( ip.src == a )&&( ip.dst == a ) ... Hmmm, I think making ( ip.addr != a ) equivalent to ! ( ip.addr == a ) is not a good idea. That will ruin the Collectively Exhaustiveness of current implementation about "ip.addr". If we are to keep CE-ness of the operations and yet make ( ip.addr != a ) equivalent to !( ip.addr == a ), I think we need some way to describe ( ip.src == a )&&( ip.dst == a ) using ip.addr, like ... ( ip.addr === a )? # and ( ip.addr !== a ) ≡ ( ip.src != a )||( ip.dst != a ) Rather, I'll vote on keeping != as is. Many people are confused with how != works because ( ip.src != a )&&( ip.dst != a ) is the second most frequently used filter pattern. Good documents will decrease this confusion. best regards, -- 奥山 健一(Kenichi Okuyama) [煤背会: No. 0x00000001] URL: http://www.dd.iij4u.or.jp/~okuyamak/ http://developer.osdl.jp/projects/doubt/ _______________________________________________ Wireshark-dev mailing list Wireshark-dev@wireshark.org http://www.wireshark.org/mailman/listinfo/wireshark-dev
