OK, corrected already in v3.3.8. The TTCN-3 team is really a responding one...:) BR, Gyorgy
>
Original Message
> From: György Réthy
> Sent: Tuesday, 24 June, 2008 12:42 PM
> To: 'active_ttcn3 : mts stf133 ttcn version 3 - active members only'
> Subject: RE: getreply / signature question
>
> Hi Mike,
>
> thanks for your careful reading. No, there is no "implicit
> template" associated with signatures, this is just an error
> in the text; it should be e.g.
> any port.getreply(Myproc:?);
>
> It would be useful to send a comment to the MTS-GEN mailing
> list on this. You can do it, if you are subscribed, or I can
> do it on your behalf, if you wish.
>
> BR, Gyorgy
>
> >
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 Michael Sperber
> > Sent: Tuesday, 24 June, 2008 9:37 AM
> > To: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
> > Subject: getreply / signature question
> >
> > In the 3.3.7 draft, at the end of 22.3.4, there's this example:
> >
> > any port.getreply(Myproc)
> >
> > But Myproc is only a signature, not a template instance, which is
> > supposed to have a "TemplateBody". Or do signatures count
> as template
> > instances somehow? Help would be much appreciated!
> >
> > --
> > Regards,
> > Mike
> >
