JTC1/SC22/WG14 N655

Document: N655	J11/97-018
Title:    N504 and N643 (C9X Draft 8)



The editorial review committee for N504 has agreed the following wording
(given as diffs against draft 8). Can you please allocate this a formal
number and put it into the process.

While it seems silly that something this small can't be handled at Kona,
I will understand if you tell me that the procedure won't let it be.

====
 1. In subclause 7.10, paragraph 3, change:

          va_list

       which is a type

    to:

          va_list

       which is an object type

 2. In subclause 7.11.1, Introduction, paragraph 2, change:

          fpos_t

        which is an object type

     to:

          fpos_t

        which is an object type other than an array type

 The Rationale text is:

  In the case of va_list, there is no indication that the type must be
  an object type. In the case of fpos_t, there is no requirement for the
  type to be assignable (that is, not an array). If fpos_t were an
  array, then a function would not be able to handle fpos_t parameters
  in the same manner as other fpos_t variables. These are the only cases
  where a perverse implementation is possible. All other types defined
  by the Standard have sensible properties.