errata/92: PROPOSAL - 17.10.2 should talk about leading plus sign

From: Shalom.Bresticker@motorola.com
Date: Mon Jan 06 2003 - 01:38:28 PST

  • Next message: Shalom.Bresticker@motorola.com: "errata/249: 3.11.3: needless reference to 1364-1995"

    Precedence: bulk

    Add the following sentence after the second sentence of the
    first paragraph of section 17.10.2:

      "This string should not include the leading plus sign of
       the command line argument."

    ************************************************************
    Shalom:

    1. That should be:

      "This string shall not ..." instead of "should not".

    Also:

    2. In para. 2,

    CHANGE: "as well as a leading 0 forms"
    TO : "as well as leading 0 forms".

    3. In para. 3, end of line 3,

    CHANGE: "users plusarg_string"
    TO : "user's plusarg string".

    4. In para. 4, end of line 1,

    CHANGE: "zero (0) padded"
    TO: "zero-padded".

    ************************************************************
    Shalom (added 2003-01-06):

    CHANGE THE 3rd and 4th sentences in the first paragraph
    FROM:

    "If the string is found, the remainder of the string is
    converted to the type specified in the user_string and the
    resulting value stored in the variable provided. If a string
    is found, the function returns a non-zero integer."

    TO (incorporating wording from 17.10.1):

    "The plusargs present on the command line are searched in
    the order provided. If the prefix of one of the supplied
    plusargs matches all characters in the provided string,
    the function returns a non-zero integer,
    the remainder of the string is
    converted to the type specified in the user_string and the
    resulting value is stored in the variable provided."

    ************************************************************

    http://boydtechinc.com/cgi-bin/issueproposal.pl?cmd=view&pr=92

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Mon Jan 06 2003 - 01:39:03 PST and
    sponsored by Boyd Technology, Inc.