CVS difference for ai05s/ai05-0022-1.txt

Differences between 1.3 and version 1.4
Log of other versions for file ai05s/ai05-0022-1.txt

--- ai05s/ai05-0022-1.txt	2007/12/13 04:39:34	1.3
+++ ai05s/ai05-0022-1.txt	2008/05/10 05:14:33	1.4
@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-!standard A.18.2(239/2)                                   07-11-20    AI05-0022-1/03
+!standard A.18.2(239/2)                                   08-04-09    AI05-0022-1/04
 !standard A.18.3(152/2)
 !standard A.18.4(75/2)
 !standard A.18.7(96/2)
@@ -23,12 +23,12 @@
 that the "=" operator deletes an element from some globally visible list L,
 and that we are calling Find (L, ...). Presumably the implementation of
 Find keeps internally a pointer designating some node of L, and if that designates
-the element node that was deleted, that pointer will left dangling,
-which is recipe for erroneousness.
+the element node that was deleted, the pointer will be left dangling,
+which is a recipe for erroneousness.
 
 We say that the behavior of Find with a misbehaving "=" is unspecified,
-but A.18(4.v/2) explains that we don't intend for erroneousness to be
-allowed.
+but A.18(4.v/2) explains that we don't intend that erroneous execution
+be allowed.
 
 !recommendation
 
@@ -56,7 +56,7 @@
 simplified if they can preclude any ongoing changes to the
 container during the operation.  These will need to check
 for tampering.  Since generic actual subprograms in these
-cases will often be intrinsic operators or small inlinable
+cases will often be intrinsic operators or small inlineable
 subprograms, the check need not be a significant overhead
 for "macro"-expanded generics, since the optimizer can probably
 determine whether the state of the tampering flag, whatever

Questions? Ask the ACAA Technical Agent