On Nov 22, 2013, at 2:10 PM, Michael Lum <michael.lum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> I ran the checkAPIs.pl script against the files I have modified and it complains about a lot of proto_tree_add_text() calls.
>
> I would like to fix them but after looking at the README.dissector document I'm left wondering if there is an easier way
> than using proto_tree_add_item.
>
> The places in the dissector where add_text() is used were for labelling parts of the protocol without having to create
> filterable fields.
A better term is "named fields", as a field's name can be used in places other than filter expressions - which, themselves, should perhaps be called "packet-testing expressions", as they're used for more than filtering; they can be used for coloring as well.
This means that:
> For example, in packet-ansi_a.c there are 457 useless add_text() calls vs 26 add_<something else>() calls.
>
> Do I have to add 457 items (approximately, some may duplicate) to hf_register_info ?
>
> Basically, I want to just label a bunch of bits or octets, no subtree, not filterable.
...a named field is more than "filterable"; it can be used to make a custom column, or can be used in TShark output with "-T fields", and possibly other places I've forgotten about.
That's why we encourage making named fields and using them - somebody might find a use for them, even if you don't have a use for them.
