IMHO,

I wouldn't "equalize" non-existent parameter with empty string. There are header parameters (maddr,rport,isfocus) which may not have value and someone (who knows?) might need to check for them. I would just not forbid this option from the config file...

I would just use the @ and !@ uses for detecting presence or absence of attributes and letting the == to check for the value once you know it exists. It "complicates" a little bit config file but makes it clearer and I think easier to debug.

So, for me it's fine changing example config files and documenting it.

my 0.02,
Samuel

2007/6/8, Michal Matyska <michal@iptel.org >:
Samuel,

yes it is related to. The resolution of SER-263 was wrong and every test
like   if (@select=="")  has returned false, even the return value of
the select was empty string.

But, there is another problem I see in the config (including the example
script)...

There is difference between the (@select) test and (@select!="") one.
The latter returns false, if the select framework returns N/A value
(e.g. non present header/parameter).

Intended behaviour was: @X is @route[1].params.lr in this example
(as the tag must have value if present rfc3261 19.3)

lr parameter    test    result
not present     @X      false
                !@X     true
                @X==""  FALSE*
                @X!=""  FALSE*


lr              @X      true
                !@X     false
                @X==""  true
                @X!=""  false

lr=123          @X      true
                !@X     false
                @X==""  false
                @X!=""  true


As I see the from the example ser.cfg, the tests are done in the
(@to.tag=="") way, which won't work if the to.tag would return either
N/A or the tag value. But it seems it returns the empty string even if
not present, because it was previously working.

So I ask the community (especially TB potential members) do we want to
take care about the select N/A value differently, or shall we make it
equal to empty string?

Note, that if the answer is yes, it will be very hard to differentiate
between parameter not present and parameter without value - well the lr
parameter is handled internally, but what others?

If the anwser is no, keep special N/A value handling, the select must be
reviewed together with the ser.cfg, because (@to.tag=="") will be false
for every tag (because it must have value).

Michal

On Čt, 2007-06-07 at 13:56 +0200, samuel wrote:
> Michal,
>
> I've just post a question to users' list about not properly detecting
> @to.tag=="".
>
> Is this bug related to it??
>
> Thanks,
> Samuel.
>
> 2007/6/7, Michal Matyska (JIRA) < tracker@iptel.org>:
>              [ http://tracker.iptel.org/browse/SER-263?page=all ]
>
>         Michal Matyska reopened SER-263:
>         --------------------------------
>
>
>         The way it is now resolved is wrong. If the select returns
>         empty string the script test if (@select=="")  is false.
>
>         > Using @select=~ "regexp" causes segmentation fault
>         > --------------------------------------------------
>         >
>         >                 Key: SER-263
>         >                 URL: http://tracker.iptel.org/browse/SER-263
>         >             Project: SER
>         >          Issue Type: Bug
>         >          Components: core, Selects
>         >    Affects Versions: 2.0, Ipteldorf
>         >         Environment: CVS head
>         >            Reporter: Michal Matyska
>         >         Assigned To: Michal Matyska
>         >            Priority: Minor
>         >             Fix For: 2.0, Ipteldorf
>         >
>         >
>         > If the result of the select is empty string or it is
>         STR_STATIC_INIT ( e.g. @uri.type) the prepatation of left
>         operand (putting \0 behind the string) causes segmentation
>         fault .
>         > Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault.
>         > comp_str (op=11, left=0xbfad27a4, rtype=5, r=0x81932b0,
>         msg=0x81a1034) at route.c:668
>         > 668                             left->s[left->len]='\0';
>
>         --
>         This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
>         -
>         If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the
>         administrators:
>         http://tracker.iptel.org/secure/Administrators.jspa
>         -
>         For more information on JIRA, see:
>         http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
>
>
>         _______________________________________________
>         Serdev mailing list
>         Serdev@lists.iptel.org
>         http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serdev
>
> _______________________________________________
> Serdev mailing list
> Serdev@lists.iptel.org
> http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serdev