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

ID | Project | Category | View Status | Date Submitted | Last Update
0008040 | Part 01: TTCN-3 Core Language | Clarification | public | 07-09-2021 10:30 | 24-11-2021 09:17

Reporter | Gusztáv Adamis |
Assigned To | Jens Grabowski |
Priority | normal | Severity | minor | Reproducibility | have not tried
Status | closed | Resolution | fixed |
Platform |  | OS |  | OS Version |
Product Version |  |
Target Version |  | Fixed in Version |  |
Clause Reference(s) | 7.1.0 and 7.3
Source (company - Author) | Gusztáv Adamis Ericsson

Summary | 0008040: => operator is missing from List of TTCN-3 operators and Precedence of Operators tables
Description | In 7.3 "he string value preceding the => operator shall be decoded into a value of the type following the => operator." But => operator is missing from List of TTCN-3 operators (7.1.0 Table 5) and Precedence of Operators (7.1.0 Table 6) tables
Steps To Reproduce |
Additional Information |
Tags | No tags attached.
Relationships |
Attached Files | CR0008040.docx (175,404) 10-11-2021 15:51 http://oldforge.etsi.org/mantis/file_download.php?file_id=4050&type=bug CR0008040-2.docx (176,015) 11-11-2021 15:23 http://oldforge.etsi.org/mantis/file_download.php?file_id=4057&type=bug CR0008040-3.docx (175,660) 11-11-2021 15:31 http://oldforge.etsi.org/mantis/file_download.php?file_id=4058&type=bug

Issue History
Date Modified | Username | Field | Change
07-09-2021 10:30 | Gusztáv Adamis | New Issue |
07-09-2021 14:42 | Jacob Wieland - Spirent | Note Added: 0015949 |
08-09-2021 11:39 | Jens Grabowski | Assigned To | => Jens Grabowski
08-09-2021 11:39 | Jens Grabowski | Status | new => assigned
09-09-2021 09:31 | Jens Grabowski | Project | TTCN-3 Change Requests => Part 01: TTCN-3 Core Language
09-11-2021 09:18 | Jens Grabowski | Note Added: 0016035 |
09-11-2021 09:18 | Jens Grabowski | Assigned To | Jens Grabowski => Jacob Wieland - Spirent
09-11-2021 12:38 | Jacob Wieland - Spirent | Note Added: 0016038 |
09-11-2021 12:47 | Jacob Wieland - Spirent | Note Edited: 0016038 | bug_revision_view_page.php?bugnote_id=16038#r566
10-11-2021 12:57 | Jens Grabowski | Note Added: 0016053 |
10-11-2021 12:58 | Jens Grabowski | Assigned To | Jacob Wieland - Spirent => Gusztáv Adamis
10-11-2021 15:51 | Gusztáv Adamis | File Added: CR0008040.docx |
10-11-2021 15:56 | Gusztáv Adamis | Note Added: 0016058 |
10-11-2021 15:56 | Gusztáv Adamis | Assigned To | Gusztáv Adamis => Jacob Wieland - Spirent
10-11-2021 15:56 | Gusztáv Adamis | Status | assigned => confirmed
11-11-2021 15:23 | Jacob Wieland - Spirent | File Added: CR0008040-2.docx |
11-11-2021 15:24 | Jacob Wieland - Spirent | Status | confirmed => assigned
11-11-2021 15:25 | Jacob Wieland - Spirent | Note Added: 0016069 |
11-11-2021 15:25 | Jacob Wieland - Spirent | Assigned To | Jacob Wieland - Spirent => Tomas Urban
11-11-2021 15:25 | Jacob Wieland - Spirent | Status | assigned => confirmed
11-11-2021 15:31 | Gusztáv Adamis | File Added: CR0008040-3.docx |
11-11-2021 15:35 | Gusztáv Adamis | Note Added: 0016070 |
12-11-2021 08:44 | Tomas Urban | Note Added: 0016071 |
12-11-2021 08:44 | Tomas Urban | Status | confirmed => resolved
12-11-2021 08:44 | Tomas Urban | Resolution | open => fixed
12-11-2021 08:44 | Tomas Urban | Assigned To | Tomas Urban => Jens Grabowski
24-11-2021 09:17 | Jens Grabowski | Note Added: 0016106 |
24-11-2021 09:17 | Jens Grabowski | Status | resolved => closed

Notes

(0015949)
Jacob Wieland - Spirent
07-09-2021 14:42

It is supposed to be of equal precedence with the '.' (Dot) operator.

(0016035)
Jens Grabowski
09-11-2021 09:18

Sorry, but the tables do not include a Dot operator. Please have a look. Might be easier to resolve the CR directly.

(0016038)
Jacob Wieland - Spirent
09-11-2021 12:38 (edited on: 09-11-2021 12:47)

Well, the problem is that the dot operator is not really an operator in the classical sense between two expressions (it has an expression on the left and an identifier/selector on the right). It is on the same precedence level as the indexing notation and the decoding operation, all of them are left-associative to each other.
(This can be seen in the BNF in the rule for ExtendedFieldReference)
a.b[x].d=>e.f == ((((a.b)[x]).d)=>e).f
So, I would propose to introduce a sort of meta-line as 2nd highest precedence in the precedence table where all these postfix-notations are listed (selection, indexing, decoding)

(0016053)
Jens Grabowski
10-11-2021 12:57

STF discussion: Rename "=>" operator to "=>" notation, e.g., decoding notation and possibly add a note about left associativity of Dot notation, Index notation and Decoding notation.

(0016058)
Gusztáv Adamis
10-11-2021 15:56

@Jacob pls check it, and if ok, forward it to @Jens

(0016069)
Jacob Wieland - Spirent
11-11-2021 15:25

Added some changes (mostly removal of the words operand for the decoding notation to not implicitly make this into an operator). Please review

(0016070)
Gusztáv Adamis
11-11-2021 15:35

Just one thing: from the NOTE I have removed the == in front of the 'is equivalent to' that @Jacob added. If you accept it, can be closed and sent to @Jens

(0016071)
Tomas Urban
12-11-2021 08:44

Fine by me. The last draft (CR0008040-3.docx) can be added to the core language specification.

(0016106)
Jens Grabowski
24-11-2021 09:17

Implemented