[asterisk-bugs] [Asterisk 0016809]: [patch] Design functionality test for dialplan pattern matching

[Asterisk Bug Tracker]

A NOTE has been added to this issue. 
====================================================================== 
https://issues.asterisk.org/view.php?id=16809 
====================================================================== 
Reported By:                lmadsen
Assigned To:                mmichelson
====================================================================== 
Project:                    Asterisk
Issue ID:                   16809
Category:                   Tests/NewFeature
Reproducibility:            N/A
Severity:                   feature
Priority:                   normal
Status:                     assigned
Asterisk Version:           SVN 
JIRA:                        
Regression:                 No 
Reviewboard Link:            
SVN Branch (only for SVN checkouts, not tarball releases): N/A 
SVN Revision (number only!):  
Request Review:              
====================================================================== 
Date Submitted:             2010-02-11 07:26 CST
Last Modified:              2010-02-11 13:44 CST
====================================================================== 
Summary:                    [patch] Design functionality test for dialplan
pattern matching
Description: 
Since we've had a couple of dialplan matching problems before in the past,
I'd like to try and create a set of tests that run through a set of complex
conditions, make sure they get the correct output (i.e. utilize the right
pattern match).

This is based from an email that Jared had sent. I know he'll have a lot
of examples to provide for this test!
====================================================================== 

---------------------------------------------------------------------- 
 (0118010) tilghman (administrator) - 2010-02-11 13:44
 https://issues.asterisk.org/view.php?id=16809#c118010 
---------------------------------------------------------------------- 
exten => _2,1,Noop(foo)
exten => _[2],1,NoOp(bar)

Second item should not be inserted, as the pattern should match as being
the same as the first. 

Issue History 
Date Modified    Username       Field                    Change               
====================================================================== 
2010-02-11 13:44 tilghman       Note Added: 0118010                          
======================================================================