On Jul 16, 2008, at 5:50 AM, Daniel Stutz wrote:
Chris Ridd wrote:
The only difference is in the field name, and as it is not part of
the encoding I see no particular reason to change anything.
The field name is part of the _decoding_.
No it is not. It has nothing to do with how bytes are encoded. It only
relevant to access the data structure before/after encoding.
However I do agree that we should change the ASN to match the latest
RFC, but the Extended class should provide both accessors for
backwards compatibility.
That means the attribute "response" is now "responseValue" in the
Message object and the accessor for "response" is returning "undef".
Where ?
Graham.
