Dear Sirs, Theo, Alexey, Vesa-Matti,
Thanks for the answers, now the picture is clear.
Regards,
Jozsef Hosszu
>
Original Message
> From: active_ttcn3 : mts stf133 ttcn version 3 - active
> members only [This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.] On Behalf Of
> Theofanis Vassiliou-Gioles
> Sent: Mittwoch, 2. Februar 2005 16:27
> To: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
> Subject: Re: TCI/TRI compliance
>
>
> Dear Jozsef,
>
> from the interface perspective the necessary functionality
> can be implemented quite well with the operations
> standardized. What is out of scope are the management aspect,
> basically, how all the parts are glued together. This is true
> for all TRI and TCI interfaces. In addition you have in C the
> question of memory management.
>
> But to specify this type of functionality requires different
> functionality at the interfaces for each language mapping.
> Thus the standard covers only the common TTCN-3 functionality.
>
> The typically solution, at least with our tools providing
> Java and C interfaces is, to offer additional interfaces,
> which are more language related. The standardized ones are
> kept unchanged.
>
> I hope this answers part of your questions.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Theo Vassiliou
> Testing Technologies
>
> Hosszu Jozsef EXT wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I have a theoretical question, about any implementation of TCI and
> > TRI.
> >
> > ES 201 873-5 and 6 defines mappings, among others, to Java
> and C. It
> > seems that a really working implementation of these
> interfaces cannot
> > be achieved implementing only the defined functions and types, but
> > other auxilliary stuff is also needed (registering objects, memory
> > management, etc.).
> >
> > Question: to what extent may these interfaces be extended with
> > additional elements, in order to remain TCI/TRI compliant?
> >
> > Best regards, Jozsef Hosszu EXT Siemens Com MN RD E 3
> >
> >
>