Section 3.3.1

LRM-261

Remove editor’s note:

Editor’s Note: Is “integral” synonymous with “singular“? Both terms are used liberally throughout the LRM. Section 12 refers to “integral singular” in multiple places. The BNF only defines “singular” (A.2.2.1). It appears to me that they are the same. If so, then only one term should be used throughout the LRM and BNF. If these terms are different, then another section needs to be added here describing singular, and the BNF needs to be defined for “integral”.

Section 3.7

LRM-262

Changes:

Use BNF changes in Section A.2.2.1 for data_type

Remove editor’s note:

Editor’s Note: This syntax ought to be in the syntax excerpt in section 3.2, but I could not find it in the Annex A BNF

Section 3.8

LRM-263

Changes:

Use BNF changes in Section A.2.4 along with variable declaration to see BNF.

Remove editor’s note:

Editor’s Note: This syntax ought to be in the syntax excerpt in section 3.2, but I could not find it in the Annex A BNF

Section 3.11.4

LRM-258

Changes:

An enum variable or identifier used as part of an expression is automatically cast to the base type of the enum declaration (either explicitly or using int as the default). An assignment to an enum variable from an expression other than an enum variable or identifier of the same type shall require a cast. Casting to an enum type shall cause a conversion of the expression to its base type without checking the validity of the value (unless a dynamic cast is used as described in Section 3.15 3.14).

Section 3.11.4.1

LRM-264

Changes:

The syntax prototype for the first() method is:

Remove editor’s note:

Editor’s Note: Would “prototype” be a better term that “syntax”, since these methods are not part of the BNF?

Section 3.11.4.2

LRM-264

Changes:

The syntax prototype for the last() method is:

Section 3.11.4.3

LRM-264

Changes:

The syntax prototype for the next() method is:

Section 3.11.4.4

LRM-264

Changes:

The syntax prototype for the prev() method is:

Section 3.11.4.5

LRM-264

Changes:

The syntax prototype for the num() method is:

Section 3.11.4.6

LRM-264

Changes:

The syntax prototype for the name() method is:

Section 3.12

LRM-265

Remove editor’s note:

Editor’s Note: I deleted the clause “i.e. an X will be read as 0...”. It no longer makes sense after change LRM-108, which reversed the sentence from converting 4-state to 2-state into converting 2-state to 4-state.

Section 3.14

LRM-267

Changes (renumber 3.14 to 3.15, 3.15 to 3.16 as the following is the new 3.14):

3.14 Singular type

A singular type includes packed arrays (and structures) and all other data types except unpacked structures, unpacked arrays, and chandles.

3.14 3.15 Casting

LRM-266

Remove editor’s note:

Editor’s Note: Should “singular_type” be included in the casting type? In fact, “simple_type” is only used by the casting_type production. Can “simple_type” be replaced with “singular_type”?

Section 3.15

LRM-267

Changes:

A singular type includes packed arrays (and structures) and all other data types except unpacked structures, unpacked arrays, and chandles.

Remove editor’s note:

Editor’s Note: The paragraph above is only definition of “singular” that I could find, outside of the BNF. The term should be defined in its own subsection, probably in 3.3.x, and the BNF included in that definition. A reference to that defining subsection should then be added to the preceding paragraph.