RE: [sv-bc] `include

Shalom,
   I am uploading a 2nd version of the proposal after taking your
feedback into account,

________________________________

From: Bresticker, Shalom [mailto:shalom.bresticker@intel.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, February 06, 2008 2:45 AM
To: Gran, Alex
Cc: sv-bc
Subject: RE: [sv-bc] `include


Alex,
 
Your proposal reads as follows:
 
The filename can be enclosed in either quotes or angle brackets, which
affects how a tool searches for the file. 

- When the filename is enclosed in double quotes ("filename"), for
relative a path the compiler's current working directory, and optionally
an implementation-dependent search-path specified by the user is
searched.

- When the filename is enclosed in angle brackets (<filename>), then
only an implementation-dependent location is searched.   Relative path
names given inside the angle brackets are interpreted relative to the
implementation-dependent location in all cases.

1. Regarding "vendor-defined" vs. "implementation-dependent", although
"vendor-defined" may not appear elsewhere, "vendor" does and in various
combinations, such as "vendor-supplied". I'm not sure it matters.
 
2. There is a grammar error, "for relative a path". Did you mean, "for a
relative path"?
 
[AG]  Yes, thanks for catching that, it was a typo.  I was going back
and forth between singular 'path' and plural 'paths' and put the 'a' in
the wrong place.
 
3. For the double-quote form, I don't think "implementation-dependent"
and "specified by the user" go together.
 
[AG] I've made both the double quote and angle bracket form use the
phrase "optionally an implementation-dependent location containing files
defined by the language standard
 
4. "search path" + "is searched" = redundancy.
[AG] yeah, noticed that, but was trying to keep the text for both forms
structured the same.  The redundancy is no longer there in my new
proposal
 
5. For the double-quote form, it omits the case where the filename is
just a name and not a path. 
[AG] Isn't a file name just a path with an implicit ./ ?
 
 
6. This omits the information that the "files defined by the language
standard" are to be in the implementation-dependent location.
[AG]  I wasn't really sure what value that phrase was adding, but it is
no longer removed
 
7. The last sentence could be simplified to "Relative path names are
interpreted relative to that location."
 
 
8. The LRM should clarify explicitly whether the
implementation-dependent location is searched for the double-quote form.
The LRM implies it is not, but it should be explicit.
[AG]  So your believe the LRM should say that 
    double quote form; search *only* current working directory and
    angle bracket form; search *only* implementation-dependent location?
 
    Is that what implementations are doing currently?
 
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.