Wireshark · Wireshark-dev: Re: [Wireshark-dev] Replace ntohl() with g_ntohl() -> automated check?

Wireshark-dev: Re: [Wireshark-dev] Replace ntohl() with g_ntohl() -> automated check?

From: Richard van der Hoff <richardv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>

Date: Thu, 09 Nov 2006 12:17:49 +0000

Ulf Lamping wrote:

LEGO wrote:
what about #defining them so they trigger an error?
Although this would be a nice solution, I don't see a way to do this -it will conflict with the existing function declarations IMHO.
I would be more than glad if we could do it that simple ...

how about running nm -u on each object file, and grepping for offendingfunctions? Would only work with non-inlined functions, obviously.


Rich


--
Richard van der Hoff <richardv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Telephony Gateways Project Manager
Tel: +44 (0) 845 666 7778
http://www.mxtelecom.com

References:
- Re: [Wireshark-dev] Replace ntohl() with g_ntohl()
  - From: Jaap Keuter
- Re: [Wireshark-dev] Replace ntohl() with g_ntohl() -> automated check?
  - From: Ulf Lamping
- Re: [Wireshark-dev] Replace ntohl() with g_ntohl() -> automated check?
  - From: LEGO
- Re: [Wireshark-dev] Replace ntohl() with g_ntohl() -> automated check?
  - From: Ulf Lamping

Prev by Date: [Wireshark-dev] Proposal for a Win32 update functionality -> http://wiki.wireshark.org/Development/Update
Next by Date: Re: [Wireshark-dev] Replace ntohl() with g_ntohl() -> automated check?
Previous by thread: Re: [Wireshark-dev] Replace ntohl() with g_ntohl() -> automated check?
Next by thread: Re: [Wireshark-dev] Replace ntohl() with g_ntohl() -> automated check?
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread