Hi Roland, I vote for not limiting the characters within a group name and not using a separator. Instead use two separate fields. I outlined a potential approach that maintains backwards compatibility and has a better user experience for the editor: https://bugs.wireshark.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16498#c6
Kind regards, Peter On Tue, Apr 21, 2020 at 12:25:26PM -0700, Ross Jacobs wrote: > Hi Roland, > > Personally, I would avoid this usage here as I read `&&` as "find the > packets where both of these display filters are valid". > > (If I'm reading you correctly) would it be possible to use `.` like > `Proto.HTTP` to mimic the expectation in display filters that right is a > component of left? I think // or any other unused operator is also > preferable. > > Cheers, > Ross > > On Tue, Apr 21, 2020 at 12:08 PM Roland Knall <rkn...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Hi > > > > We have a new feature in Wireshark, where you can sort display filters > > into subfolders. See > > https://twitter.com/bubbasnmp/status/1252627399201742848 for an example > > use case. > > > > The current implementation requires the name of the folder to be part of > > the filter name, so in the case of the picture it would read "Proto && > > HTTP" or "Proto && TCP", to create a folder "Proto" with the children > > "HTTP" and "TCP". > > > > Now the question is, if && is the correct delimiter. What do you think? > > Would // for instance make more sense? > > > > Please let me know > > > > cheers, Roland ___________________________________________________________________________ Sent via: Wireshark-dev mailing list <wireshark-dev@wireshark.org> Archives: https://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev Unsubscribe: https://www.wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev mailto:wireshark-dev-requ...@wireshark.org?subject=unsubscribe
