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

>
> 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

Would change to Yes with amendment to change

  "numbered from 0 to N (the length of the string)"

to

  "numbered from 0 to N-1 (where N is the length of the string)"
 

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

The term "byte 0" is unclear. Does this mean a byte with the value zero,
or the zeroeth byte of something? Also, does "the empty string" mean an
empty string literal? It sounds like it might allow an empty string
variable. If you can't use a non-empty string variable for type reasons,
then you shouldn't allow an empty one either. If it means an empty
string literal, then the text should make that clearer.

And Shalom also has a good point about the "out-of-bounds access". If
you want to say that writing a zero byte to it has no effect, then say
so. The fact that out-of-bounds accesses also have no effect doesn't
make this an out-of-bounds access. And in fact, the previous sentence
already said (unclearly) that putting a zero byte has no effect. Is
the second sentence redundant, or intended to also cover assignments to
an element as well as using putc? If the latter, shouldn't that
restriction be listed with the description of indexing instead?

> item 5: Typo in example, example should be modified
> _X_ Yes ____ No
>
> item 8: Usage of word string: Create a new erratum
> for this, and close 275 if all items above
>pass
> _X_ Yes ____ No
>
>================================================================
>

Steven Sharp
sharp@cadence.com
Received on Thu Dec 9 14:56:46 2004