RE: [sv-bc] Mantis 2106

I'll give an example why I think the order is important. 

> > What do you think about the reorganization of 6.21?
> 
> No real opinion.  I generally don't worry about that kind of 
> thing too much unless I think that changes actual lead to 
> incorrect inferences in the applicability of the text.

In 6.21, paragraph 3 says,

"Data declared in an automatic task, function, or block have the
lifetime of the call or activation and a local scope. This is roughly
equivalent to a C automatic variable."

OK.

Then paragraph 6 says,

"Tasks and functions can be declared as automatic, making all storage
within the task or function automatic."

Well, that seems to be repeating what is in paragraph 3, but it does not
contradict it, so maybe it is just redundant.

Then suddenly paragraph 7 says,

"Data can be explicitly declared as static. Data declared to be static
in an automatic task, function, or block have a static lifetime and a
scope local to the block. This is like C static data declared within a
function."

Wait a minute. The LRM already said twice that all data in automatic
tasks and functions are automatic. Now it is saying something different,
that there can be static data in automatic routines. 

The LRM just does not make sense that way.

Regards,
Shalom
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Intel Israel (74) Limited

This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential material for
the sole use of the intended recipient(s). Any review or distribution
by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended
recipient, please contact the sender and delete all copies.

-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.