On Nov 30, 2015, at 11:07 AM, Pascal Quantin <pascal.quantin@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Yes I should have been clearer in my initial description.
> My suggestion with an extra parameter giving the hash table address is also working fine, so I do not have a strong feeling either way (the changed parameter is faster to do but might not be the best long term solution).
Unless there's some compelling reason for them *not* to be in a dynamic library, I think making libcodec a dynamic library the best long-term solution.
> If possible I would like to have this fixed for Wireshark 2.0.1 but I wonder if such change is compatible with our usual policy to keep APIs constant (does it apply when they are buggy?).
Making it a dynamic library wouldn't change the API.
