[Fwd: errata/123: PROPOSAL - Fwd: identifier and indexing syntax]

From: Shalom Bresticker (Shalom.Bresticker@motorola.com)
Date: Wed Feb 19 2003 - 05:39:47 PST

  • Next message: Karen Pieper: "Re: Meeting on Monday"

    #123 was passed by etf, but the proposal in the fix field of the database is
    still wrong.

    There are other etfpassed issues in which the fix field also requires editing,
    such as deletion of now irrelevant comments, or omission of what is being
    changed.

    Also, in cases where we make some changes but not others (e.g., because it is
    dealt with
    in another issue), we should note it in the fix field as well, The 'fix' field
    is essentially a 'resolution' field.

    The reader should be able to find a resolution of each comment in the bug
    submission in the fix field. 

    --
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

    attached mail follows:

    Somebody re-edited my proposal wrongly.
    I am very careful about editing other people's words,
    so that such things should not occur.

    I re-send the correct proposal, with a few additional explanations.

    On Sat, 25 Jan 2003, Shalom Bresticker wrote:

    #123 started as a problem with the production of the non-terminal "primary" in
    the BNF. Specifically with the 4 lines describing hierarchical_identifiers.
    #181 combines those 4 lines into 1 line, but does not solve the problem of #123.
    The following proposal builds on #181, but further modifies it to solve as much
    as possible the problem of #123, also.

    > Replace the existing alternatives of
    > hierarchical_identifier in the primary production
    > with the following:
    >
    > hierarchical_identifier [ { '[' expression ']' } '[' range_expression ']' ]
    >

    Then I said that what is good for "primary" is also good for "net_lvalue" and
    "variable_lvalue", which we modified in #53 the same way we did to "primary" in
    #181.

    > ************************************************************
    >
    > Shalom's addition (2003-01-23):
    >
    > If this change is accepted,
    > then presumably the same change should be made to
    > net_lvalue and variable_lvalue, modifiying the fixes to
    > issues #53 and #181:
    >
    > CHANGE from (after the fixes in #53):
    >
    > net_lvalue ::=
    > hierarchical_net_identifier {'['constant_expression']'}
    > ['['constant_range_expression']']
    > | '{' net_lvalue { ',' net_lvalue } '}'
    >
    > variable_lvalue ::=
    > hierarchical_variable_identifier {'['expression']'}
    > ['['range_expression']']
    > | '{' variable_lvalue { ',' variable_lvalue } '}'
    >
    >
    > TO:
    >
    >
    > net_lvalue ::=
    > hierarchical_net_identifier [{'['constant_expression']'}
    > '['constant_range_expression']']
    > | '{' net_lvalue { ',' net_lvalue } '}'
    >
    > variable_lvalue ::=
    > hierarchical_variable_identifier [{'['expression']'}
    > '['range_expression']']
    > | '{' variable_lvalue { ',' variable_lvalue } '}'
    >
    > ************************************************************
    > http://boydtechinc.com/cgi-bin/issueproposal.pl?cmd=view&pr=123

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Wed Feb 19 2003 - 05:41:09 PST and
    sponsored by Boyd Technology, Inc.