Closed eteran closed 5 years ago
Hi, @eteran
On most projects so called “const”-patches are welcome.
If You can find more accessors with same problem and merge corrections to one patch it will be appreciated.
I agree. Even making a PR with just 6 chars patch will save me some time :)
OK, I see actually a lot of places where const
shoudl be applied. Should the PR be against dev or master?
I think to dev so it can be part of future release
yes, dev is better. I'll merge it to master later
OK, submitting a PR now.
Thanks for this contribution, much appreciated!
https://github.com/seladb/PcapPlusPlus/blob/236e035be8d7109082e1b599abd435269f13032d/Packet%2B%2B/src/RawPacket.cpp#L120
This is a simple accessor, it should be const. Not being const, unfortunately, forces me to pass RawPacket by non-const reference simply because of this one method.
I can make a PR for this if that helps, but, it's also just 6 character patch ;-)