ETSI's Bug Tracker - Part 01: TTCN-3 Core Language
View Issue Details

ID | Project | Category | View Status | Date Submitted | Last Update
0006707 | Part 01: TTCN-3 Core Language | Clarification | public | 27-03-2014 17:23 | 06-10-2014 15:46

Reporter | Andras Kovacs |
Assigned To | Axel Rennoch |
Priority | normal | Severity | minor | Reproducibility | N/A
Status | closed | Resolution | won't fix |
Platform |  | OS |  | OS Version |
Product Version | v4.6.1 (published 2014-06) |
Target Version | v4.7.1 (published 2015-06) | Fixed in Version | v4.7.1 (published 2015-06) |
Clause Reference(s) | 7.1.2
Source (company - Author) | STF470 - Andras Kovacs

Summary | 0006707: Section 7.1.2: Clarification of compatible types with the List operator
Description | Section 7.1.2 states that the list operator may act on 'values of string types, record of, set of, or array of the same root types'. Concatenation of 'record' and 'set' types have been omitted. Is this intentional?
Steps To Reproduce |
Additional Information |
Tags | No tags attached.
Relationships |
Attached Files |

Issue History
Date Modified | Username | Field | Change
27-03-2014 17:23 | Andras Kovacs | New Issue |
07-04-2014 07:14 | Andras Kovacs | Note Added: 0011930 |
08-04-2014 10:40 | Gyorgy Rethy | Note Added: 0011954 |
08-04-2014 10:41 | Gyorgy Rethy | Assigned To | => Axel Rennoch
08-04-2014 10:41 | Gyorgy Rethy | Status | new => assigned
08-04-2014 10:41 | Gyorgy Rethy | Product Version | v4.5.1 (published 2013-04) => v4.6.1 (published 2014-06)
08-04-2014 10:41 | Gyorgy Rethy | Target Version | => v4.7.1 (published 2015-06)
06-10-2014 10:05 | Axel Rennoch | Note Added: 0012218 |
06-10-2014 15:46 | Gyorgy Rethy | Note Added: 0012234 |
06-10-2014 15:46 | Gyorgy Rethy | Status | assigned => closed
06-10-2014 15:46 | Gyorgy Rethy | Resolution | open => won't fix
06-10-2014 15:46 | Gyorgy Rethy | Fixed in Version | => v4.7.1 (published 2015-06)

Notes

(0011930)
Andras Kovacs
07-04-2014 07:14

In particular, the question is whether the following type of test case expression is valid:
type set IntegerSet1 {
integer a1 optional,
integer a2 optional,
integer a3 optional
};
type set IntegerSet2 {
integer a4 optional,
integer a5 optional,
integer a6 optional
};
type set LargeSet {
integer a1 optional,
integer a2 optional,
integer a3 optional,
integer a4 optional,
integer a5 optional,
integer a6 optional
};
testcase TC_list_operator() runs on GeneralComp {
const IntegerSet1 c_set1 := {a1:=0,a2:=omit,a3:=2};
const IntegerSet2 c_set2 := {a4:=3,a5:=5,a6:=omit};
const LargeSet c_large := {a1:=0,a2:=omit,a3:=2,a4:=3,a5:=5,a6:=omit};
if ( c_set1 & c_set2 == c_large ) {
setverdict(pass);
} else {
setverdict(fail);
}
}

(0011954)
Gyorgy Rethy
08-04-2014 10:40

Ask submitter for a reasonable use case.

(0012218)
Axel Rennoch
06-10-2014 10:05

Answer by authors: The use case would be a flexible constructing of comparisons, using recordX & recordY notation for concatenation. At STF470 we are just developing the testing suite - it is up to STF478 to decide whether such use case is important enough.

(0012234)
Gyorgy Rethy
06-10-2014 15:46

The types of the operands and the result are not compatible. It is intentionally forbidden to concatenate record and set values.