errata/334: 12.6, Example 2: incorrect comment "redundant assignments to reg r"?

From: Shalom.Bresticker@motorola.com
Date: Sat Apr 26 2003 - 23:56:57 PDT

  • Next message: Shalom.Bresticker@motorola.com: "Re: errata/47: PROPOSAL - Wrong description of tri0/1 in 3.7.4"

    Precedence: bulk

    >Number: 334
    >Category: errata
    >Originator: Shalom.Bresticker@motorola.com
    >Environment:
    >Description:

    In 12.6, Example 2, there is a comment, "// redundant assignments to reg r".

    I see only one assignment, and it does not look redundant.

    I don't have 1364-1995 with me for comparison.

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sun Apr 27 2003 - 00:01:14 PDT and
    sponsored by Boyd Technology, Inc.