On Thu, Jul 10, 2014 at 5:29 AM, Evan Huus <eapache@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 9, 2014 at 10:06 PM, <mmann78@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>> I finished the conversion of proto_tree_add_text calls that were acting as
>> "subtree labels" into proto_tree_add_subtree[_format]. This removed almost
>> 4000 calls in the dissector directory (over 4000 if you include the plugins)
>> and brings the current total proto_tree_add_text count in the dissector
>> directory to 5831 (6586 over entire wireshark master trunk). Of the 5831,
>> checkAPIs.pl considers 4690 to be "useless". (I believe the criteria being
>> using printf style arguments and no return value (like when it's intended as
>> a subtree label)).
Thanks Michael for the big work.. :-)
>
>
> What about the last ~1000 "not useless" ones? How are they used?
>
>>
>> Since "subtree label" is the last "legimate" reason to use
it is no possible to add subtree also with hf field ?
>> proto_tree_add_text, should it be added as a "soft-deprecated API" to
>> checkAPIs script?
>
>
> If there really are no remaining legitimate uses, then +1.
+1
>
>>
>> I wasn't sure if that was just being too obnoxious at the moment. It may
>> need its own "paragraph" with suggestions on what to use instead (make field
>> filterable, expert info, subtree label)
>
>
> Obnoxious would be hard-deprecated :)
>
> How many actual c-files are those remaining add_text elements in? I imagine
> the majority of dissectors are now completely "clean" so it wouldn't be too
> bad.
>
> ___________________________________________________________________________
> 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
