CVS difference for ai05s/ai05-0143-1.txt

Differences between 1.3 and version 1.4
Log of other versions for file ai05s/ai05-0143-1.txt

--- ai05s/ai05-0143-1.txt	2009/07/11 03:06:22	1.3
+++ ai05s/ai05-0143-1.txt	2010/06/03 06:19:23	1.4
@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-!standard 6.01 (18)                                 09-06-27  AI05-0143-1/03
+!standard 6.01 (18)                                 10-06-02  AI05-0143-1/04
 !standard 6.06 (03)
 !class Amendment 09-02-15
 !status Amendment 201Z 09-06-27
@@ -11,7 +11,7 @@
 
 !summary
 
-Parameters of all modes are allowed in functions.
+Parameters of all modes are allowed for functions.
 
 !problem
 
@@ -49,7 +49,7 @@
 'Access, or to remove a dereference). They also require altering the declaration
 of the object to be passed (to include "aliased"). Finally, access parameters
 are more expensive at run-time than regular parameter passing, as they are
-required to include a run-tine indication of their accessibility level. The
+required to include a run-time indication of their accessibility level. The
 run-time check can even be dangerous, as the check may fail only with
 arguments declared in nested scopes, and that may not happen in unit testing.
 
@@ -85,7 +85,7 @@
 less convenient syntax and are less efficient (because of the possibility of
 dynamic accessibility checks) than "in out" parameters would be.
 
-As one commenter put described our current situation with incorrect order
+As one commenter described our current situation with incorrect order
 dependence, we're already in a deep pit, and if we're not at the bottom
 already, we're only a few centimeters above it. Thus, the problem of incorrect
 order dependence is one that should be addressed irrespective of "in out"
@@ -107,7 +107,7 @@
 to convert a function into a similar procedure call, and even when it is
 possible, the result is harder to use than necessary.
 
-However, the presense of "in out" parameters doesn't really tell us whether
+However, the presence of "in out" parameters doesn't really tell us whether
 or not we need write access to the protected object; it is perfectly reasonable
 to modify a parameter but not the protected object. This imperfect description
 is no better than the current situation in the eyes of some reviewers (an

Questions? Ask the ACAA Technical Agent