If I remember correctly, Jakub added the new API because it is
marginally more efficient in binary size and start-up cost per field.
Given we have many thousands of fields at this point, the savings of
converting the entire code base would be non-trivial.
That said, I'm not sure if conversion stopped because we ran into
problems with it or just because it was more work than people wanted
to do. I agree we should pick one and stick with it. The old API is
much more widely used still, which is a point in its favour (a lot
less work to revert) but the efficiency gains are rather appealing.
Overall I think I'd vote to keep the new API, but that is not a
particularly strong position. What do others think?
Evan
On Tue, Nov 10, 2015 at 7:40 AM, Michal Labedzki
<michal.labedzki@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> I have a plan to update Bluetooth dissector to new api/style (in
> future). Should I do that?
> Or maybe we should start merging only new style/API dissectors.
>
> On 10 November 2015 at 13:34, Alexis La Goutte
> <alexis.lagoutte@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Aug 18, 2015 at 3:52 PM, Alexis La Goutte
>> <alexis.lagoutte@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> What the status of this change ?
>>> Because no change from 2 years about this...
>>>
>>> Revert the code and feature ? or for 2.2 after cleanup proto_tree_add_text
>>> ? ;-)
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>>
>> Bump the topic...
>> because there is on review, a new protocol using this API
>> https://code.wireshark.org/review/#/c/11680/1
>>
>> I think it is better to reverse the code (and feature)...
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>>
>> ___________________________________________________________________________
>> Sent via: Wireshark-dev mailing list <wireshark-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> Archives: https://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev
>> Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev
>> mailto:wireshark-dev-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe
>
>
>
> --
>
> Pozdrawiam / Best regards
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Michał Łabędzki, Software Engineer
> Tieto Corporation
>
> Product Development Services
>
> http://www.tieto.com / http://www.tieto.pl
> ---
> ASCII: Michal Labedzki
> location: Swobodna 1 Street, 50-088 Wrocław, Poland
> room: 5.01 (desk next to 5.08)
> ---
> Please note: The information contained in this message may be legally
> privileged and confidential and protected from disclosure. If the
> reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby
> notified that any unauthorised use, distribution or copying of this
> communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this
> communication in error, please notify us immediately by replying to
> the message and deleting it from your computer. Thank You.
> ---
> Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail.
> ---
> Tieto Poland spółka z ograniczoną odpowiedzialnością z siedzibą w
> Szczecinie, ul. Malczewskiego 26. Zarejestrowana w Sądzie Rejonowym
> Szczecin-Centrum w Szczecinie, XIII Wydział Gospodarczy Krajowego
> Rejestru Sądowego pod numerem 0000124858. NIP: 8542085557. REGON:
> 812023656. Kapitał zakładowy: 4 271500 PLN
> ___________________________________________________________________________
> Sent via: Wireshark-dev mailing list <wireshark-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Archives: https://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev
> Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev
> mailto:wireshark-dev-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe
