Re: errata/650: 9.7.6 does not explicitly say what happens if "wait" condition is x or z

From: Shalom.Bresticker@freescale.com
Date: Tue Feb 15 2005 - 10:50:00 PST

  • Next message: Steven Sharp: "Re: errata/650: 9.7.6 does not explicitly say what happens if "wait" condition is x or z"

    The following reply was made to PR errata/650; it has been noted by GNATS.

    From: Shalom.Bresticker@freescale.com
    To: Steven Sharp <sharp@cadence.com>
    Cc: etf-bugs@boyd.com
    Subject: Re: errata/650: 9.7.6 does not explicitly say what happens if "wait"
     condition is x or z
    Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2005 21:06:18 +0200 (IST)

     I agree that this was the intent. However, the terms true and false are almost
     certainly used in other contexts where x and z are not included. So it would
     be more precise to say that x is considered false in the context of a
     condition, not an arbitrary expression.
     
     And even there, there are exceptions. Remember issue 237?
     
     Further, if someone looks up what is written in 9.6 or 9.7.6, there is no
     reason he should think that 9.4 is relevant.
     
     I see no reason not to specify it more clearly.
     
     Shalom
     
     
     On Tue, 15 Feb 2005, Steven Sharp wrote:
     
    > 9.6 does not specify what happens if a "while" condition is x or z either.
    > It does specify it for a "for" condition.
    >
    > 9.4 does define what it means for an expression to evaluate as "true" or
    > "false". It does so in the context of "if" statements, but there is
    > nothing to restrict the definition to that context. So that definition
    > would apply to these other situations that refer to an expression being
    > "true" or "false" also. It may not be the best organized, but I think
    > it is specified.
     

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Tue Feb 15 2005 - 10:50:05 PST and
    sponsored by Boyd Technology, Inc.