!standard 09.01 (09) 00-06-21 AI95-00116/05 !class binding interpretation 98-03-27 !status Corrigendum 2000 99-07-28 !status WG9 approved 98-06-12 !status ARG Approved (with changes) 13-0-0 97-11-16 !status work item 96-04-04 !status received 96-04-04 !priority Low !difficulty Easy !qualifier Omission !subject Elaboration of a task with no task_definition !summary For a task declaration with no task_definition, an empty task_definition is assumed. !question A legal task_type_declaration is task type TT; By the grammar in paragraph 2, this task_type_declaration does not include a task_definition. Paragraph 10 says that the elaboration of a task declaration elaborates the task_definition; what if there isn't one? (An empty task_definition is elaborated.) Paragraph 11 says the elaboration of a task_definition creates the task type and its first subtype; if there is no task_definition, when are the task type and its first subtype created? (There is an empty task_definition.) !recommendation (See summary.) !wording Insert after paragraph 9.1 (9): For a task declaration without a task_definition, a task_definition without task_items is assumed. !discussion The question not only applies to the syntax of 9.1(2) , but equally to the syntax of 9.1(3), i.e., to all task declarations. The intent is clear. The fix means that task type TT; is equivalent to task type TT is end TT; providing an implicit, empty task_definition. !corrigendum 9.1(9) @dinsa A @fa defines a task type and its first subtype. The first list of @fas of a @fa, together with the @fa, if any, is called the visible part of the task unit. The optional list of @fas after the reserved word @b is called the private part of the task unit. @dinst For a task declaration without a @fa, a @fa without @fas is assumed. !ACATS test ACATS tests C650001, C940001, and C940005 (and some others) use the construct in question. !appendix !section 9.1(02) !subject Elaboration of task type with no task_definition !reference RM95-9.1(2) !reference RM95-9.1(10,11) !from Keith Thompson 95-11-17 !reference 95-5392.a Keith Thompson 95-11-17>> A legal task_type_declaration is task type TT; By the grammar in paragraph 2, this task_type_declaration does not include a task_definition. Paragraph 10 says that the elaboration of a task declaration elaborates the task_definition; what if there isn't one? Paragraph 11 says the elaboration of a task_definition creates the task type and its first subtype; if there is no task_definition, when are the task type and its first subtype created? The intent seems obvious. A good fix would be to state that task type TT; is equivalent to task type TT is end TT; providing an implicit task_definition. ****************************************************************