ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG5 N1661

      WG5 letter ballot on N1660, Second Draft Technical Corrigendum 2
                         John Reid, 6 June 2006


At meeting #176 {May-2006 in Las Vegas}, J3 accepted all of the suggestions 
in the notes in N1659, the first Draft Technical Corrigendum 2. Malcolm Cohen 
had some editorial revisions that Stan Whitlock as head of J3/interp agreed 
to also. David and I think these are improvements and David has prepared
N1660 to include them (apart from a minor word change re the placement of an 
edit in the standard). The new changes are not in 06-006t2.txt, but if this 
vote passes, Stan will prepare 06-006t3.txt to reflect them. 

The new changes are very minor, but to send N1660 to SC22 now would break our
rules for processing interpretations. We have been meticulous in the past 
about using our two-stage voting process to avoid controversy over corrigenda.
For this reason, I am holding a WG5 letter ballot on N1660. 


 Relative to N1659, the changes are:

- All notes except the top one have been removed.

- 4.4.4.1: the change suggested in N1658 was accepted by J3.

- 4.5.5.2:  the change suggested in N1659 was accepted by J3;  Malcolm
     suggested these improvements:

	In the first line of the fourth paragraph of the subclause,
	(a) after the first "structure constructor" insert "or array
	    constructor"
	(b) delete the second" structure".

	  The fourth paragraph of the subclause [59:27-28] will read:

	   If an executable construct references a structure constructor or
         array constructor, the entity created by the constructor is
         finalized after execution of the innermost executable construct
         containing the reference.

	In the new sixth paragraph introduced by TC1, do the same change.

	   The new sixth paragraph [59:30+] will read:

	    If a specification expression in a scoping unit references a
          structure constructor or an array constructor, the entity created
          by the constructor is finalized before execution of the executable
	    constructs in the scoping unit.


- 8.1.5 - the subclause reference should be 8.1.5.1.

- 9.5.1.3 - Malcolm suggested slightly different edits. 

- 9.5.3.7.1 - Stan suggested that the directions for this edit read:

	"... add the following after the first item ..."

     This edit suggested in N1658 was accepted by J3 with the phrase
     "input/output".

- 10.10.1.3 - Malcolm suggests the following rewording to comply with the
     WG5 comment:

	{Replace the first edit to avoid "separated by a separator"; since
 	a separator is allowed to be contiguous blanks or a slash, and we
 	do not want to allow either of those.}

	  [244:29] Change "a comma" to
	           "a comma (if the decimal edit mode is POINT) or a
	            semicolon (if the decimal edit mode is COMMA),"


................................. cut ......................................

Vote on N1660 (anyone may vote):

Yes

Yes, with the following comment

No, for the following reasons


Please select one of these and send it to

        sc22wg5@dkuug.dk

by 8 a.m (UK time) on Friday, 7 July 2006.

Thanks,

John.