Hi,
That would probably be #1.
This option makes verification against a protocol spec / RFC easiest,
also such values don't have to be sequential.
Thanks,
Jaap
Send from my iPhone
On 14 feb 2010, at 22:21, Kaul <myk...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Which one is better?
> option 1:
> #define SSL_HND_HELLO_REQUEST 0
> #define SSL_HND_CLIENT_HELLO 1
> ...
>
> or perhaps, option 2:
> enum {
> SSL_HND_HELLO_REQUEST,
> SSL_HND_CLIENT_HELLO,
> };
> ...
>
> and then (in both cases):
>
> const value_string ssl_31_handshake_type[] = {
> { SSL_HND_HELLO_REQUEST, "Hello Request" },
> { SSL_HND_CLIENT_HELLO, "Client Hello" },
>
>
> ?
>
> TIA,
> Y.
>
> ___________________________________________________________________________
> Sent via: Wireshark-dev mailing list <wireshark-dev@wireshark.org>
> Archives: http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev
> Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev
> mailto:wireshark-dev-requ...@wireshark.org?subject=unsubscribe
___________________________________________________________________________
Sent via: Wireshark-dev mailing list <wireshark-dev@wireshark.org>
Archives: http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev
Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev
mailto:wireshark-dev-requ...@wireshark.org?subject=unsubscribe
