Wireshark · Wireshark-dev: Re: [Wireshark-dev] FW: [Wireshark-commits] rev 46479: /trunk/epan/dissectors/ /trunk/epan/dissector

[Martin Mathieson <martin.r.mathieson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Maybe.  I'm guessing we'd probably want to improve decode_bits_in_field() to avoid those g_strlcat() calls by keeping track of the offset.

Martin

On Sun, Dec 9, 2012 at 11:07 AM, Anders Broman <anders.broman@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Hi,
Would using proto_tree_add_bits_item() be less efficient? Possibly that can be improved which would give
A better over all improvement I think.
Regards
Anders

-----Original Message-----
From: wireshark-commits-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:wireshark-commits-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of martinm@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: den 9 december 2012 05:50
To: wireshark-commits@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [Wireshark-commits] rev 46479: /trunk/epan/dissectors/ /trunk/epan/dissectors/: packet-per.c

http://anonsvn.wireshark.org/viewvc/viewvc.cgi?view=rev&revision=46479

User: martinm
Date: 2012/12/08 08:49 PM

Log:
 Similarly avoiding calling g_snprintf() in dissect_per_constrained_integer().

Directory: /trunk/epan/dissectors/
  Changes    Path            Action
  +7 -1      packet-per.c    Modified

___________________________________________________________________________
Sent via:    Wireshark-commits mailing list <wireshark-commits@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Archives:    http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-commits
Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-commits
             mailto:wireshark-commits-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe

___________________________________________________________________________
Sent via:    Wireshark-dev mailing list <wireshark-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Archives:    http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev
Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev
             mailto:wireshark-dev-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe