[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       ethereal-dev
Subject:    Re: [Ethereal-dev] recursive taps
From:       "Ronnie Sahlberg" <ronnie_sahlberg () ozemail ! com ! au>
Date:       2002-10-31 21:48:00
[Download RAW message or body]

Ah, now I think i understand what you mean. It does sound interesting and
might be useful
for some type of taps.

I would love to see an experimental implementation in action with a listener
using the API.



----- Original Message -----
From: "Jason House"
Sent: Friday, November 01, 2002 2:33 AM
Subject: Re: [Ethereal-dev] recursive taps


> As far as API for recursive taps, her is one possibility:
>
> /* init routine that returns rs instead of storing it in the tapping core
*/
> void* /* returns pointer to rs */
> init_sub_tap_listener( char *cmd, char *config ); /* called to initialize
each
> sub_tap */
>
> /* provide access (if needed) for a tap to call another tap's functions */
> /* truly recursive taps that only call themselves, will never use this
since
> they already know which functions to call */
> ethereal_tap_list* /* the structure holding the function pointers */
> find_tap_listener( char *cmd ); /* called once post registration */
>
> The first function being analogous to the previously proposed
initialization
> call of  char* init_tap_listener( char *cmd, char *config ).  Overall, the
two
> added function calls are extra for allowing recursion.  The normal taps
can
> function as they normally would.  The individual _init() routines for each
tap
> listener currently call register_tap_listener().  There could be some kind
of
> flag that init_sub_tap_listener would set/unset in order to make the
> register_tap_listener() not insert the new tap listener into the tapping
core,
> but merely hold onto rs for init_sub_tap_listener() to return.
>
> I know there are variants on the approach, but I think all implementations
would
> be relatively simple...   Eventually, I should try coding more than I
talk...
> but I know that for most of november, I will not have that luxury.  For
now, I'm
> just adding commentary for thought... Please don't interpret my
talking/review
> of implementations as dislike.  I'm highly interested in the tap system,
but
> lack the time resources that I would like to dedicate to it.
>


_______________________________________________
Ethereal-dev mailing list
Ethereal-dev@ethereal.com
http://www.ethereal.com/mailman/listinfo/ethereal-dev
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]