Anonymous | Login | Signup for a new account | 2024-03-28 18:05 UTC |
Main | My View | View Issues | Change Log | Roadmap |
View Issue Details [ Jump to Notes ] | [ Issue History ] [ Print ] | ||||||||
ID | Project | Category | View Status | Date Submitted | Last Update | ||||
0000807 | Taste | [All Projects] ASN.1 Compiler v4 | public | 2018-09-19 13:42 | 2021-05-21 09:01 | ||||
Reporter | maxime | ||||||||
Assigned To | gmamais | ||||||||
Priority | normal | Severity | minor | Reproducibility | have not tried | ||||
Status | closed | Resolution | fixed | ||||||
Platform | OS | OS Version | |||||||
Summary | 0000807: Optional field and ACN size determinant | ||||||||
Description | Consider this grammar :
And the corresponding ACN :
The field "length" added in T1 to act as length determinant of the field "a" is inherited by T2. However T2 has no field "a" as it is optional in T1 and absent in T2. | ||||||||
Tags | No tags attached. | ||||||||
Attached Files | |||||||||
Notes | |
(0003472) gmamais (developer) 2018-09-22 12:31 edited on: 2018-09-22 17:27 |
Issue fixed.
|
(0003474) maxime (administrator) 2018-09-22 17:21 edited on: 2018-09-22 17:26 |
Amazing. Thanks. How about this grammar:
in uPER the subtype constraint is ignored, but in ACN, it should replace the one of the super-type. |
(0003477) gmamais (developer) 2018-09-23 05:50 |
The fact is that when we initially designed ACN we introduced a "single basic rule" that when no ACN encoding properties are provided in a given type then this type should be encoded as in uPER. Please tell me if you wish to proceed with the above change. I realize that WITH COMPONENT constraints are used a lot in the real world grammars since they a provide a layer of abstraction and therefore are very important. |
(0003478) maxime (administrator) 2018-09-23 09:15 edited on: 2018-09-23 09:15 |
Agreed (with history and way forward). Let's go for it. This brings a lot of added value to ACN, which then can be used to produce encodings that are better than PER with no additional effort for the user. In the same spirit, CHOICE constraints could handle this case:
Sub-Choice could have no determinant field (only one possible choice here), and if only a subset of choices is kept, the choice determinant would take it into account (this is not the case in the ICD right now). |
(0003591) gmamais (developer) 2019-03-18 17:20 |
all new issues are OK. v4Tests/test-cases/acn/16-mantis/0000807b.asn1 which demonstrates the new features |
(0003760) maxime (administrator) 2021-05-21 09:01 |
Thanks, closing |
Issue History | |||
Date Modified | Username | Field | Change |
2018-09-19 13:42 | maxime | New Issue | |
2018-09-19 13:42 | maxime | Status |
new => assigned |
2018-09-19 13:42 | maxime | Assigned To |
=> gmamais |
2018-09-22 12:31 | gmamais | Note Added: 0003472 | |
2018-09-22 12:31 | gmamais | Status |
assigned => resolved |
2018-09-22 12:31 | gmamais | Resolution |
open => fixed |
2018-09-22 17:21 | maxime | Note Added: 0003474 | |
2018-09-22 17:21 | maxime | Note Edited: 0003474 | View Revisions |
2018-09-22 17:22 | maxime | Note Edited: 0003474 | View Revisions |
2018-09-22 17:23 | maxime | Note Edited: 0003474 | View Revisions |
2018-09-22 17:26 | maxime | Note Edited: 0003474 | View Revisions |
2018-09-22 17:27 | maxime | Note Edited: 0003472 | View Revisions |
2018-09-22 17:27 | maxime | Note Edited: 0003472 | View Revisions |
2018-09-23 05:50 | gmamais | Note Added: 0003477 | |
2018-09-23 05:50 | gmamais | Status |
resolved => assigned |
2018-09-23 09:15 | maxime | Note Added: 0003478 | |
2018-09-23 09:15 | maxime | Note Edited: 0003478 | View Revisions |
2018-09-23 09:22 | maxime | Relationship added |
related to 0000543 |
2019-03-18 17:20 | gmamais | Note Added: 0003591 | |
2019-03-18 17:20 | gmamais | Status |
assigned => resolved |
2021-05-21 09:01 | maxime | Note Added: 0003760 | |
2021-05-21 09:01 | maxime | Status |
resolved => closed |
Copyright © 2000 - 2011 MantisBT Group |