[Bro-Dev] would a patch for #981 be accepted?

[Seth Hall]

On Apr 19, 2013, at 3:02 PM, Robin Sommer <robin at icir.org> wrote:

> An alternative would be to have the lookup return a copy of the
> default, but not modify the table.

I think this is reasonable and the way I'd expect it to work at least.  I've never seen anyone doing things with &default that would violate it either.  On the upside I've never seen anyone give a non-constant &default value.

  .Seth

--
Seth Hall
International Computer Science Institute
(Bro) because everyone has a network
http://www.bro.org/