Viewing Issue Simple Details
[ Jump to Notes ]
|
[ Issue History ]
[ Print ]
|
ID |
Category |
Severity |
Type |
Date Submitted |
Last Update |
0000916 |
[1003.1(2013)/Issue7+TC1] Base Definitions and Headers |
Comment |
Error |
2015-01-25 21:09 |
2019-06-10 08:54 |
|
Reporter |
ggolden |
View Status |
public |
|
Assigned To |
|
Priority |
normal |
Resolution |
Accepted |
|
Status |
Closed |
|
|
|
|
Name |
Glenn D. Golden |
Organization |
|
User Reference |
GDG13 |
Section |
XBD 9.5.3 |
Page Number |
195 |
Line Number |
6433 - 6434 |
Interp Status |
--- |
Final Accepted Text |
See desired action |
|
Summary |
0000916: Prohibition on ERE grammar extensions should pertain only to _strictly_ conforming applications |
Description |
Per the discussion in this thread
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.standards.posix.austin.general/8259/ [^]
and in particular, a follow-on by Geoff Clare dated Thu,10 Oct 2013 10:37:04 +0100: It seems that the word "strictly" is missing from the second sentence in line 6433, due to a transcription error that probably occurred sometime around 2001.
Summary: As presently worded, any application which fails to diagnose extended EREs cannot be conforming in any sense, which seems to be far from what was intended. If the word "strictly" is added, then the prohibition against using extended EREs applies only to strictly conforming applications, which does seem to have been the intent.
Much more detail appears in the above thread. |
Desired Action |
Second sentence in line 6433 should read, "Strictly conforming applications cannot use...". (Word "strictly" is added.) |
Tags |
tc2-2008 |
|
Attached Files |
|
|