Error condition key words "ormore" and "orless" are not processed

[fletchwsf]

The syntax card for EMV2 allows for an error condition to be defined by "numeric literal ormore { error condition}". Currently when the "ormore" and "orless" keywords are used the defined error conditions are not processed by the FTA tool.

Also, should the set of allowable numeric literals include negative numbers and zero, or only numbers greater than/equal to 1?

[reteprelief]

ormore and orless are just short-hand operators for you specifying a and b or a and c as 2 orless (a,b,c)
In that context negative numbers do not seem to make sense. zero ormore would mean anything including absence of errors.
zero orless just says absence of an error condition which is handled by noerror.

It may be the case that Julien's implementation for FTA generation currently does not interpret ormore/orless.

[juli1]

This is the case - the FTA tool does not process these expressions. I asked Bill to fill a report to keep track of the issue and eventually fix it as soon as possible.

[reteprelief]

I was primarily responding to Bill's question about zero or negative numerals for these operators.

[fletchwsf]

Peter, thank you for the additional information, it is consistent with my understanding of how the function should work. Regarding the use of negative numbers or zero, I was being pedantic, and should have been clearer with regards to my intent, which was to ask for the compiler to protect me from a logical/coding error such as using a number less than 1.