--- Guy Harris <guy@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Stephen Fisher wrote:
>
> > My bad, it does work as I had intended. It highlights the field (with
> > the function highlight_field()) whenever you do a hex or string search,
> > but not when you do a filter search. Should we add filter search
> > matches too?
>
> I'd say "yes" - if a search pattern of any sort matches a packet because
> it matches a particular field in the packet, it should highlight the
> matching field regardless of the type of the match.
>
> That does raise an interesting question - if a pattern matches *more
> than one* field in a packet, should "find next" find the next instance
> that matches, even if it's in the same packet, or should it find the
> next instance in that packet and, if there is no next instance in that
> packet, search subsequent packets? There are probably places where the
> former is useful and places where the latter is useful.
Why not both?
Ctrl-N Find Next
Shift-Ctrl-N Find Next packet
Yea I know Shift-Ctrl-N is already used, but you get the idea. (How about
Meta-Ctrl-N? Is my emacs showing? ;-)
-Andrew
-Andrew Feren
acferen@xxxxxxxxx
