Attention is currently required from: laforge, neels.

View Change

1 comment:

• File msc/BSC_ConnectionHandler.ttcn:

  • Patch Set #2, Line 1360: function f_expect_paging(template OCT4 tmsi := *)

    Not blocking; But this patch breaks one paradigm of this function: see below how we use g_pars.imsi.
    Now this is not using g_pars.tmsi as would be logical, but the caller is passing a TMSI explicitly.

    Yes, this is an inconsistency that I acknowledge.

    This is the reason why i all the time and still and always will think a boolean is semantically the right choice. To fix it, you'd also have to make the imsi an argument that is passed in and not taken from g_pars.

    This is an option, but that would require all callers of this function to pass IMSI (`g_pars.imsi`) implicitly. Unlike with TMSI, I hardly see a scenario in which one would want to pass anything else than `g_pars.imsi`. So by doing that we would loose more than win.

    As a compromis, I propose the following:

    ```
    function f_expect_paging_tmsi(template OCT4 tmsi := *) { ... }
    function f_expect_paging() {
        f_expect_paging_tmsi(g_pars.tmsi);
    }
    ```

    This way we would be using `g_pars.imsi` and `g_pars.tmsi` by default, but at the same time allow the API user to overwrite the TMSI expectations.

To view, visit change 36455. To unsubscribe, or for help writing mail filters, visit settings.