From owner-sc22wg5+sc22wg5-dom9=www.open-std.org@open-std.org Mon Dec 14 16:21:17 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sc22wg5-dom9 Delivered-To: sc22wg5-dom9@www.open-std.org Received: by www.open-std.org (Postfix, from userid 521) id 3FF4B3568AC; Mon, 14 Dec 2020 16:21:17 +0100 (CET) Delivered-To: sc22wg5@open-std.org Received: from mail-qt1-f169.google.com (mail-qt1-f169.google.com [209.85.160.169]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by www.open-std.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D2B293566AB for ; Mon, 14 Dec 2020 16:21:16 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail-qt1-f169.google.com with SMTP id b9so12056294qtr.2 for ; Mon, 14 Dec 2020 07:21:16 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=stevelionel.com; s=google; h=to:from:subject:message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version :content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=3ijB19hYWnq5aKU6W39ttv3uIkf9stsBR+H1ACkhpME=; b=hItBK9L8yG4QNMHz40TrLj1oQ71HP5vjCF3RGhOe2uG+WNQQT3t8cM4AvprHNWK4DF yTUVz0DDdnFElkCI9wC2EzXuQSiYL+uMI3RN4pYWXFYV8gedrIMIvU6vnXkHc/2GSMJf m+9/zFOfjeaICLlxc6f/7LYPYV87CVxpuUEx0= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:to:from:subject:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=3ijB19hYWnq5aKU6W39ttv3uIkf9stsBR+H1ACkhpME=; b=E4mtEKKhY+FwLg+bFAQTdjwNiqBnCGqBL8HEg0ZNTS8MY0p6OHgVu6FQVWZkpsZcCZ shc3rlhuUQx44YWd1mib6PWlPse1pl9as+03aZ2LKjKp+IuBD5LtEgdfbrINCK7OFElN U6HxbzQzz3yHLKSkI0yq3ACCxjCLwhieszvHdW1gxucvazqkr655rhW3+rDM++VvBnn8 tNf9e0X5IJUmBRPUIMNeSejrScvtGYtqn3Sd+t/IYbryc53kYL+bVUUa88HFc0wEFZ0U 58MgdThR93HkBkMrYjMGQP/bGaLCVPDokMSGpfvj1NcSvc1ah+u/Iwu2iDADZxtcTfUI EujA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531tHCTm3ovbT2AfuxO0ae2/jEEVPCZQBDg77zmTJX8qdHVE1gu3 cIxMQW03HJKWCNO/3tD7zRJmEiTbnFU2zuVY X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJx7NHsoXGCjWRdI85ucs++0v3BMl44gMOy7zvAXgwT7ApQyPY35Qha61xcgw9u3z1mFKPbUTA== X-Received: by 2002:ac8:130d:: with SMTP id e13mr31527805qtj.228.1607959274738; Mon, 14 Dec 2020 07:21:14 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.1.33] ([71.169.142.206]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id c8sm4099929qkc.12.2020.12.14.07.21.13 for (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 14 Dec 2020 07:21:14 -0800 (PST) To: WG5 List From: Steve Lionel Subject: Comments on Corrigendum 1 draft X-Clacks-Overhead: GNU Terry Pratchett Message-ID: <432767ab-63c6-483e-05ec-cc0c4fe21550@stevelionel.com> Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2020 10:21:13 -0500 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.5.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html; charset=windows-1252 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: owner-sc22wg5@open-std.org Precedence: bulk

Thanks to all who sent me comments/votes on the Corrigendum 1 draft. Below are the individual comments. David, please consider the comments and incorporate them into a new draft. Thanks.

Steve

Malcolm:

Approval with comments. Comments marked *** need to be corrected before publication IMO.

Comment 1 (cosmetic): all the “index sibling team” instructions should be “index sibling teams”, as the term is plural not singular (the wording for a “sibling team” term would have been more complicated).

Comment 2 (trivial cosmetic): the locator [101:13,14] should be [101:13-14] (hyphen not comma).

*** Comment 3 (editorial) for [167:8], the Subclause number should be “10.2.2.4” not “10.2.4.4”.

Comment 4 (editorial) for [175:21], the inserted text should have the reference “(19.6.8)” appended (there is no reference after the immediately preceding “variable definition context”, but that is because there is a ref earlier in the sentence).

Comment 5 (cosmetic): the locator [401:24-45] should be [401:24-25].

*** Comment 6 (technical) for [528:22+] this needs an additional edit, to paragraph two at [528:23], change “two” to “three” (because we just added an item to the list).

BTW I reviewed the paper three times... once initially (fairly brief), the second time when I went through and applied those edits to the 007, and a third time when I carefully compared the paper to revised 007. If there are further changes I will modify the 007 accordingly.

Brian:

I vote 'Approval.' Thanks.

Tom:

Approval

Anton:

Approval with comments

Comment 1 - a typo:

    Subclause 10.2.4.4
                        [167:8] f18/011

    In the third paragraph of the subclause, replace
    "elemental intrinsic procedure even if the pointer object is not elemental."
    with
    "elemental intrinsic procedure, even though the pointer object is not elemental."

This should be Subclause 10.2.2.4, not 10.2.4.4.

Reuben:

Approve.

Bill:

I'll have to vote “approval with comment” since I did find one irregularity. In 18-007r1, which I assume is the base document for the changes, Subclause 10.2.4.4 has only 2 paragraphs, yet the edit for that subclause begins “In the third paragraph…”. It appears something has gone wrong here. Probably the subclause number, since 10.2.4.4 is related to FORALL that does not seem relevant to the content of 10.2.4.4.

Nathan:

Approval.

Ondrej:

Approval with comments

I read the documents, and haven't seen any mistakes. But I haven't checked against the documents that were voted upon to ensure everything was included with the same wording.