RE: [sv-ec][URGENT] email ballot #4, on Erratum 275, voting closes on 15 Dec 2004

Mehdi,

Three No votes with comments, and one Yes.

Bill

>
> ===============Erratum 275, =========
>
> Please respond to the items in this erratum, place an X in
> the appropriate box and place explanation for No vote.
>
> Errata 275 (proposal uploaded 12/8/2004, also attached)
> item 1. The type of a single character within a string is byte
> ____ Yes __X__ No
>

A single character should be a "byte unsigned" not just "byte", which is
signed.

Also, I don't like this sentence from Section 3.7, at the end of
paragraph 4:
"A string shall not contain the special character "\0".

People using strings will expect similar behavior as in C, for example
they might want to shorten a string by explicitly putting a 0 in the
middle of a string.

> item 2: The putc method has only one prototype: task putc(int i,
byte c );
> ____ Yes _X___ No

I think the blue text is confusing: It says that if the second argument
is an "empty string" then the variable is unaffected.

But "unaffected" means that the Note about being semantically equivalent
to an assignment is confusing and incorrect - this note should be
removed. But it could be replaced with equivalent code that does the
checking for 0-length and 0-valued strings.

Also, this proposal should have examples that state if these common
usages are legal or illegal:

        str.putc(i, "A");
        str.putc(i, "AB");

        string x = "A";
        str.putc(i, x);

>
> item 5: Typo in example, example should be modified
> ____ Yes _X___ No

The example should include this:

        string x = "A";
        str[j] = x; // OK or not OK?

>
> item 8: Usage of word string: Create a new erratum
> for this, and close 275 if all items above
pass
> _X___ Yes ____ No
>
> ================================================================
>
>
>
Received on Thu Dec 9 08:05:03 2004