Number | 139
|
Category | errata
|
Synopsis | 19.3.1 miscellaneous small errata
|
State | lrmdraft
|
Class | errata-discuss
|
Arrival-Date | Oct 02 2002
|
Originator | Shalom.Bresticker@motorola.com
|
Release | 2001b, 19.3.1
|
Environment |
|
Description |
(A) In Syntax 19-2, in "formal_argument_identifier", "formal_argument" is in italics. This is a remnant from 1364-1995. It should be all in regular font, with an additional line, formal_argument_identifier ::= identifier . (B) Should that be simple_identifier, not just identifier? (C) Sentence 4 says, "The compiler shall substitute the text of the macro for the string `macro_name." First, that should be `text_macro_name. But it is still correct only when there are no arguments. As the paragraph after Syntax 19-3 says, "For a macro without arguments, the text shall be substituted as is for every occurrence o`text_macro_name. However, a text macro with one or more arguments shall be expanded by substituting each formal argument with the expression used as the actual argument in the macro usage." (D) The last sentence of NOTE (1)at the end of 19.3.1 is "Here, the larger of the two expressions p + q and r + s will be evaluated twice." This sentence is incorrectly in Courier font. |
Fix |
Proposal for Errata 139: Part I: In Syntax Box 19-2: Change each existing occurrence of "formal_argument_identifier" where the "formal_argument" part is in italics to be in all normal non-italic font. Part II: In Syntax Box 19-2: Add the following rule after the existing rule for "text_macro_identifier": formal_argument_identifier ::= simple_identifier No italics should be used in the above rule. Part III: In Paragraph 1 of 19.3.1: REPLACE the 4th sentence: "The compiler shall substitute the text of the macro for the string `macro_name." Note: `macro_name is in courier font. WITH: The compiler shall substitute the text of the macro for the string `text_macro_name and any actual arguments which follow it. Note: `text_macro_name is in courier font. Part IV: In Note 1) of 19.3.1: The last sentence in Note 1) is in courier font and is formatted as if it were part of the example code that precedes it. REFORMAT the sentence: "Here, the larger of the two expressions p + q and r + s will be evaluated twice." so that it is separated from the example that precedes it and is in the same font as the other regular text in the note. |
Audit-Trail |
From: Shalom.Bresticker@motorola.com To: Brad Pierce <Brad.Pierce@synopsys.com> Cc: etf-bugs@boyd.com Subject: RE: errata/139: 19.3.1 miscellaneous small errata Date: Sat, 5 Oct 2002 20:48:54 +0300 (IDT) >Category: errata >Confidential: no >Originator: Shalom.Bresticker@motorola.com >Class: TBD >Description: Except that if you look at A.8.3, msb_constant_expression and lsb_constant_expression are no longer italicized. I cannot access the PDF or FM version of the standard right now, so I cannot search them to check whether these terms appear anywhere else in the standard. Does 1.3f still apply in 1364-2001 or should it be deleted as well? Shalom On Fri, 4 Oct 2002, Brad Pierce wrote: > According to Section 1.3.f > > "If the name of any category starts with an italicized part, > it is equivalent to the category name without the italicized > part. The italicized part is intended to convey some > semantic information. For example, msb_constant_expression > and lsb_constant_expression are equivalent to constant_expression." > > In the text, the "msb_" and "lsb_" are italicized. From: Shalom Bresticker <Shalom.Bresticker@motorola.com> To: Brad Pierce <Brad.Pierce@synopsys.com>, etf-bugs@boyd.com Cc: Subject: Re: errata/139: 19.3.1 miscellaneous small errata Date: Mon, 07 Oct 2002 11:39:01 +0200 >Category: errata >Confidential: no >Originator: Shalom Bresticker <Shalom.Bresticker@motorola.com> >Class: TBD >Description: --------------E823DFE49CAEAA87D038AEB7 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit They appear in Syntax 3-1, 3-2, 3-4, 3-5, all unitalicized. However, I found that in Section 18 (e.g, Syntax 8-16), there is use of the italics convention. So 1.3f should be changed to msb_index and lsb_index. Shalom Shalom.Bresticker@motorola.com wrote: > Except that if you look at A.8.3, msb_constant_expression and > lsb_constant_expression are no longer italicized. > > I cannot access the PDF or FM version of the standard right now, > so I cannot search them to check whether these terms appear > anywhere else in the standard. > > Does 1.3f still apply in 1364-2001 or should it be deleted as well? > > Shalom > > On Fri, 4 Oct 2002, Brad Pierce wrote: > > > According to Section 1.3.f > > > > "If the name of any category starts with an italicized part, > > it is equivalent to the category name without the italicized > > part. The italicized part is intended to convey some > > semantic information. For example, msb_constant_expression > > and lsb_constant_expression are equivalent to constant_expression." > > > > In the text, the "msb_" and "lsb_" are italicized. -- Shalom Bresticker Shalom.Bresticker@motorola.com Design & Reuse Methodology Tel: +972 9 9522268 Motorola Semiconductor Israel, Ltd. Fax: +972 9 9522890 POB 2208, Herzlia 46120, ISRAEL Cell: +972 50 441478 "The devil is in the details." --------------E823DFE49CAEAA87D038AEB7 Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit <!doctype html public "-//w3c//dtd html 4.0 transitional//en"> They appear in Syntax 3-1, 3-2, 3-4, 3-5, all unitalicized. However, I found that in Section 18 (e.g, Syntax 8-16), there is use of the italics convention. So 1.3f should be changed to msb_index and lsb_index. Shalom
Shalom.Bresticker@motorola.com wrote:
I cannot access the PDF or FM version of the standard right now,
Does 1.3f still apply in 1364-2001 or should it be deleted as well?
Shalom
On Fri, 4 Oct 2002, Brad Pierce wrote:
> According to Section 1.3.f
-- Shalom Bresticker Shalom.Bresticker@motorola.com Design & Reuse Methodology Tel: +972 9 9522268 Motorola Semiconductor Israel, Ltd. Fax: +972 9 9522890 POB 2208, Herzlia 46120, ISRAEL Cell: +972 50 441478 "The devil is in the details." --------------E823DFE49CAEAA87D038AEB7-- From: Shalom.Bresticker@motorola.com To: drm@xilinx.com Cc: etf-bugs@boyd.com Subject: Re: errata/139: PROPOSAL - 19.3.1 miscellaneous small errata Date: Sun, 25 May 2003 10:49:40 +0300 (IDT) Comments: > Part II: > > In Syntax Box 19-2: > > Add the following rule after the existing rule for "text_macro_identifier": > > formal_argument_identifier ::= simple_identifier In contrast to my original speculation, I now think that formal_argument_identifier should be just plain identifier, and not restricted to simple_identifier, a restriction that to the best of my knowledge does not exist elsewhere. > Part III: > > In Paragraph 1 of 19.3.1: > > REPLACE the 4th sentence: > WITH: > > The compiler shall substitute the text of the macro for the string `text_macro_name > and any actual arguments which follow it. This still does not express the idea explained in the paragraph after Syntax 19-3, that formal arguments are replaced by actual arguments. Since it IS explained later on, it does not need to be duplicated here, but it should not mislead. It's only a minor issue, though. Let's not spend too much time on it. > http://boydtechinc.com/cgi-bin/issueproposal.pl?cmd=view&pr=139 |
Unformatted |
|
Hosted by Boyd Technology