Austin Group Defect Tracker

Aardvark Mark IV

Main | My View | View Issues | Change Log | Docs
  

Viewing Issue Simple Details [ Jump to Notes ] [ Issue History ] [ Print ]
ID Category Severity Type Date Submitted Last Update
0001088 [1003.1(2016/18)/Issue7+TC2] Shell and Utilities Editorial Clarification Requested 2016-10-18 10:58 2016-10-27 18:20
Reporter Mark_Galeck View Status public  
Assigned To
Priority normal Resolution Withdrawn  
Status Closed  
Name Mark Galeck
Organization
User Reference
Section 2.10.1 Shell Grammar Lexical Conventions
Page Number 2375
Line Number 75892-75893
Interp Status ---
Final Accepted Text
Summary 0001088: "When more than one rule applies, the highest numbered rule shall apply " is pointless
Description The phrase "When more than one rule applies, the highest numbered rule shall apply" is pointless, since for each production of the grammar, there is at most one rule mentioned after the production in a comment action.

Some of the rules do refer to additional rules, but that is not to say an additional rule can be applied to start with, alternatively to the one mentioned in the comment action.
Desired Action Delete the phrase above, so one is left with the sentence "A rule may in turn refer to another rule". This leftover is wholly obvious, so the whole sentence may be deleted altogether.
Tags No tags attached.
Attached Files

- Relationships
duplicate of 0001100Closed Rewrite of Section 2.10 Shell Grammar, of the Shell Standard, to fix previous reports, fix new issues, and improve presentation. 
related to 0001093Closed "or applies globally" is pointless 

-  Notes
(0003431)
kre (reporter)
2016-10-19 09:17

 As I interpret things, this issue is relayed to your issue 1093.
The "or applies globally" that you want to delete in 1093, I believe,
means "rule one always applies". Hence any time another rule
explicitly applies, there are two, and the higher numbered one
takes precedence (and can then delegate back to rule 1 again if it wants,
as for example rule 7a does, sometimes.)

This all looks to be a rather convoluted way of getting the desired
result, but I don't believe it is incorrect.
(0003435)
Mark_Galeck (reporter)
2016-10-19 10:49

 Fine. If the Austin Group is OK with "convoluted" way of explaining things, as it sounds like that's the case, well, I have done my civic programmer duty to report, and then I am happy if you don't change anything . As a colleague once put it "if software were easy to understand, anybody could do it, and then we would not be paid the big bucks that we are, now are we?". No sarcasm intended.
(0003469)
Mark_Galeck (reporter)
2016-10-27 12:46

 This report can be cancelled.
(0003480)
Don Cragun (manager)
2016-10-27 18:20

 Withdrawn by submitter in Note: 0003469

- Issue History
Date Modified Username Field Change
2016-10-18 10:58 Mark_Galeck New Issue
2016-10-18 10:58 Mark_Galeck Name => Mark Galeck
2016-10-18 10:58 Mark_Galeck Section => 2.10.1 Shell Grammar Lexical Conventions
2016-10-18 10:58 Mark_Galeck Page Number => 2375
2016-10-18 10:58 Mark_Galeck Line Number => 75892-75893
2016-10-19 09:17 kre Note Added: 0003431
2016-10-19 10:49 Mark_Galeck Note Added: 0003435
2016-10-19 15:48 nick Relationship added related to 0001093
2016-10-27 12:46 Mark_Galeck Note Added: 0003469
2016-10-27 18:20 Don Cragun Interp Status => ---
2016-10-27 18:20 Don Cragun Note Added: 0003480
2016-10-27 18:20 Don Cragun Status New => Closed
2016-10-27 18:20 Don Cragun Resolution Open => Withdrawn
2018-04-12 15:38 eblake Relationship added duplicate of 0001100

Mantis 1.1.6[^]
Copyright © 2000 - 2008 Mantis Group
Powered by Mantis Bugtracker