Re: [OpenSER-Devel] returning 0 from function
Hi Henning, We need to consider the user (script writer) experience also. As Klaus stated, there are many function just breaking script (returning script) because the user should not do anything further. The best example is t_newtran() or t_check_trans() - if a retransmission is detected, TM module will automatically handle this is the correct way (according to RFC 3261) and exist - this is something the user should not care about how to handle So, disregarding the implementation details, I strongly consider that we need to keep the possibility for a function to break the script execution. Regards, Bogdan Henning Westerholt wrote: On Monday 03 March 2008, Juha Heinanen wrote: Dan Pascu writes: AFAIK, there are functions in tm that rely on this, including t_relay if I'm not mistaken. I'd say that until a list of the module functions that use this behavior is made so we can draw a conclusion, it's premature to assume this will be easy to change, or that is even possible to give up on the behavior without major code restructuring. in my openser.cfg i do call exit also after t_relay. i think is it is very bad programming practice to relay certain functions to exit the script implicitly. in my opinion, no module function should cause the script to exit. it should be always the decision of script writer. Hi Juha, yes, i've also the same opinion. But there will be probably many configs out there that do rely on this behaviour, and will break if we change this. So i also think this is not something that we should treat lightly. Cheers, Henning ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.openser.org http://lists.openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devel ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.openser.org http://lists.openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: [OpenSER-Devel] returning 0 from function
On 03/03/08 06:21, Juha Heinanen wrote: i noticed that if allow_source_address_from_group() returns group value 0, statement $var(group) = allow_source_address_from_group(); never returns. is this intentional, i.e., are functions disallowed to return value 0? by returning 0, the execution of the script is interrupted -- same behavior as 'exit'. Cheers, Daniel -- juha ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.openser.org http://lists.openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devel ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.openser.org http://lists.openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: [OpenSER-Devel] returning 0 from function
Daniel-Constantin Mierla writes: by returning 0, the execution of the script is interrupted -- same behavior as 'exit'. that is what i suspected. in my opinion there is too much under cover things happening here. it would be easier to debug and understand things if script would not terminate implicitly like this, but only if explicitly terminated by 'exit' or running out from the last route block. -- juha ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.openser.org http://lists.openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: [OpenSER-Devel] returning 0 from function
Daniel-Constantin Mierla writes: perhaps going to clear return codes handling will be better. Since the beginning of ser, the meaning of return codes was: - greater than 0 was considered true - less than 0 was considered false - 0 was considered exit. Now it is about backward compatibility on a hand and clear and better understanding return code handling on the other hand. Perhaps a debate on devel/users will make decision easier. my vote is to remove the 0 equals exit option. -- juha ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.openser.org http://lists.openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: [OpenSER-Devel] returning 0 from function
El Monday 03 March 2008 09:54:23 Juha Heinanen escribió: Daniel-Constantin Mierla writes: perhaps going to clear return codes handling will be better. Since the beginning of ser, the meaning of return codes was: - greater than 0 was considered true - less than 0 was considered false - 0 was considered exit. Now it is about backward compatibility on a hand and clear and better understanding return code handling on the other hand. Perhaps a debate on devel/users will make decision easier. my vote is to remove the 0 equals exit option. I don't like that 0 equals exit at all. -- Iñaki Baz Castillo [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.openser.org http://lists.openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: [OpenSER-Devel] returning 0 from function
On Monday 03 March 2008, Juha Heinanen wrote: Daniel-Constantin Mierla writes: perhaps going to clear return codes handling will be better. Since the beginning of ser, the meaning of return codes was: - greater than 0 was considered true - less than 0 was considered false - 0 was considered exit. Now it is about backward compatibility on a hand and clear and better understanding return code handling on the other hand. Perhaps a debate on devel/users will make decision easier. my vote is to remove the 0 equals exit option. My guess is that this will not be easy to do as there are currently functions that rely on this to stop processing the message and they do so based on some internal checks/conditions that are not testable from the script. Besides I personally do not want to fill up my script with lots of checks after each function call, just to find out if I'm to continue or not. For this reason, I believe that a return value that indicates that the processing should stop there is necessary. Should that not be 0 because 0 is such a common value that may be useful to return from functions, that is a different story. -- Dan ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.openser.org http://lists.openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: [OpenSER-Devel] returning 0 from function
Dan Pascu writes: My guess is that this will not be easy to do as there are currently functions that rely on this to stop processing the message and they do so based on some internal checks/conditions that are not testable from the script. are you saying that you have lots of functions you call that can as side effect terminate processing of the script? what standard openser module functions are such? -- juha ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.openser.org http://lists.openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: [OpenSER-Devel] returning 0 from function
On Monday 03 March 2008, Juha Heinanen wrote: Dan Pascu writes: My guess is that this will not be easy to do as there are currently functions that rely on this to stop processing the message and they do so based on some internal checks/conditions that are not testable from the script. are you saying that you have lots of functions you call that can as side effect terminate processing of the script? what standard openser module functions are such? AFAIK, there are functions in tm that rely on this, including t_relay if I'm not mistaken. I'd say that until a list of the module functions that use this behavior is made so we can draw a conclusion, it's premature to assume this will be easy to change, or that is even possible to give up on the behavior without major code restructuring. -- Dan ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.openser.org http://lists.openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: [OpenSER-Devel] returning 0 from function
Dan Pascu writes: AFAIK, there are functions in tm that rely on this, including t_relay if I'm not mistaken. I'd say that until a list of the module functions that use this behavior is made so we can draw a conclusion, it's premature to assume this will be easy to change, or that is even possible to give up on the behavior without major code restructuring. in my openser.cfg i do call exit also after t_relay. i think is it is very bad programming practice to relay certain functions to exit the script implicitly. in my opinion, no module function should cause the script to exit. it should be always the decision of script writer. -- juha ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.openser.org http://lists.openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: [OpenSER-Devel] returning 0 from function
On Monday 03 March 2008, Juha Heinanen wrote: Dan Pascu writes: AFAIK, there are functions in tm that rely on this, including t_relay if I'm not mistaken. I'd say that until a list of the module functions that use this behavior is made so we can draw a conclusion, it's premature to assume this will be easy to change, or that is even possible to give up on the behavior without major code restructuring. in my openser.cfg i do call exit also after t_relay. i think is it is very bad programming practice to relay certain functions to exit the script implicitly. in my opinion, no module function should cause the script to exit. it should be always the decision of script writer. Hi Juha, yes, i've also the same opinion. But there will be probably many configs out there that do rely on this behaviour, and will break if we change this. So i also think this is not something that we should treat lightly. Cheers, Henning ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.openser.org http://lists.openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: [OpenSER-Devel] returning 0 from function
Henning Westerholt writes: yes, i've also the same opinion. But there will be probably many configs out there that do rely on this behaviour, and will break if we change this. So i also think this is not something that we should treat lightly. in that case perhaps we can add a config variable allow_implicit_exit which defaults to YES. -- juha ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.openser.org http://lists.openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: [OpenSER-Devel] returning 0 from function
On Monday 03 March 2008, Juha Heinanen wrote: Dan Pascu writes: AFAIK, there are functions in tm that rely on this, including t_relay if I'm not mistaken. I'd say that until a list of the module functions that use this behavior is made so we can draw a conclusion, it's premature to assume this will be easy to change, or that is even possible to give up on the behavior without major code restructuring. in my openser.cfg i do call exit also after t_relay. i think is it is very bad programming practice to relay certain functions to exit the script implicitly. in my opinion, no module function should cause the script to exit. it should be always the decision of script writer. I do not debate here the good or bad programming practices of doing this, I only highlighted the fact that it may not be so easy to change this given how intricate interaction between the many involved entities. Anyway, even if you are to take that decision, you will do it based on something the function has returned, so in the end a value to indicate this would be required, even if it's not 0. -- Dan ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.openser.org http://lists.openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: [OpenSER-Devel] returning 0 from function
Juha Heinanen wrote: Dan Pascu writes: My guess is that this will not be easy to do as there are currently functions that rely on this to stop processing the message and they do so based on some internal checks/conditions that are not testable from the script. are you saying that you have lots of functions you call that can as side effect terminate processing of the script? what standard openser module functions are such? t_check_trans() does, also the ..._challenge() functions do. regards klaus ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.openser.org http://lists.openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devel
