<mmann78@...> writes:
> For those of you that aren't masochists and follow the bug mailing list, I
> added support for "(display) filterable" expert info. Expert info can now
> also be used as a display filter. And just like the proto_tree_add_text
> to proto_tree_add_item conversion, there's work to be done making all the
> expert info calls filterable.
Nice!
> Quick synopsis:
> expert_add_info - used for static strings
> expert_add_info_format_text - used for formatted (printf) strings
> I'd eventually like to replace the existing expert_add_info_format with the
> expert_add_info_format_text signature when the conversions are complete
> because I think it's the more appropriate name.
I was wondering about the naming convention here. proto_tree_add_text() is
for adding text that isn't filterable, but expert_add_info_format_text(),
even if temporary, would be for adding fields that are filterable. Would it
be better to use the proto* naming convention, something like:
expert_add_info -> expert_add_info_string
expert_add_info_format_text -> expert_add_info_item()
And come to think of it, this is the "expert info" API, so maybe it should be:
expert_info_add_string
expert_info_add_item
