Re: [NSE][PATCH] datafiles.lua

[David Fifield <david () bamsoftware com>]

On Mon, Sep 15, 2008 at 10:13:51AM +0200, Sven Klemm wrote:
> Hey jah,
> |
> | I envisioned the possibility of removing the
> | parse_protocols/services/rpc functions at some point in the future.  The
> | common_files table holds a default format for the returned data for each
> | file and allows simply calling, for example, parse_file( "nmap-services"
> | ) and can easily be extended to include any future data files that might
> | be included with nmap.
> |
> | Personally, I think that script writers will find it more intuitive to
> | call parse_file in this way than being required to call specific
> | functions for the various data files.  What do you think?
>
> the reason for the proposal was to remove a few if-branches for common
> file handling in parse_file(). I prefer parse_rpc() over
> parse_file('nmap-rpc') but I don't mind if we keep it the way it's
> currently implemented.

I also prefer parse_rpc and similar functions for the other data files.
parse_file("nmap-services") and parse_file("nmap-rpc") look like they
they are doing the same thing to two different files, but they are not.
The two calls do different things based on the file name they are
passed.

I like Sven's proposal of keeping file-specific information in separate
functions and making parse_file generic, like its name makes it sound.

David Fifield

_______________________________________________
Sent through the nmap-dev mailing list
http://cgi.insecure.org/mailman/listinfo/nmap-dev
Archived at http://SecLists.Org