|
Site Menu Project Specification Implementation Recommendations Reference Needs Updating Work in Progress Wastebasket Wiki Manual |
List Of Outstanding IssuesWiP.ListOfOutstandingIssues HistoryHide minor edits - Show changes to output 2010-06-13 09:09
by -
Changed line 1 from:
As of June to:
As of June 12, 2010 the following issues are outstanding: 2010-06-13 09:08
by -
Changed lines 4-5 from:
* should @@SXF@@ to:
* should @@SXF@@ and @@VAL@@ primitives be pervasives or in module @@COMPILER@@ ? Changed line 7 from:
* should @@SET@@ @@OF@@ only be followed by @@namedType@@ ? to:
* should type constructor @@SET@@ @@OF@@ only be followed by @@namedType@@ ? 2010-06-13 09:07
by -
Changed line 4 from:
* should SXF/VAL primitives be pervasives or in module @@COMPILER@@ ? to:
* should @@SXF@@/@@VAL@@ primitives be pervasives or in module @@COMPILER@@ ? 2010-06-13 09:07
by -
Changed line 7 from:
* should SET OF only be followed by @@namedType@@ ? to:
* should @@SET@@ @@OF@@ only be followed by @@namedType@@ ? 2010-06-13 09:07
by -
Changed line 7 from:
* should SET OF only be followed by to:
* should SET OF only be followed by @@namedType@@ ? 2010-06-13 09:07
by -
Changed lines 4-5 from:
* should to:
* should SXF/VAL primitives be pervasives or in module @@COMPILER@@ ? Changed lines 7-11 from:
* !!!!Procedures * should open array autocast be marked and imported to:
* should SET OF only be followed by nameType ? Deleted line 21:
2010-06-11 17:16
by -
Changed lines 1-2 from:
As of June to:
As of June 11, 2010 the following issues are outstanding: Deleted line 18:
2010-06-07 09:02
by -
Added line 19:
* confirm removal of usage cases for anonymous types Changed lines 21-22 from:
to:
Deleted line 23:
2010-06-06 10:45
by -
Changed line 1 from:
As of June to:
As of June 5, 2010 the following issues are outstanding: 2010-06-06 10:45
by -
Changed line 4 from:
* should @@digitCapacity@@ have a binding or should it be a magic name? to:
* should @@digitCapacity@@ have a binding or should it be a magic name or a pragma? 2010-06-06 10:44
by -
Changed line 4 from:
* to:
* should @@digitCapacity@@ have a binding or should it be a magic name? 2010-06-04 11:22
by -
Changed line 4 from:
* use [&] for digitCapacity constant? to:
* use @@[&]@@ for @@digitCapacity@@ constant? 2010-06-04 11:21
by -
Added lines 3-5:
!!!!Operator Bindings * use [&] for digitCapacity constant? Deleted lines 7-9:
!!!!Operator Bindings * use [&] for digitCapacity constant? 2010-06-04 11:20
by -
Changed lines 4-5 from:
* to:
* native subrange type constructor: @@TYPE S = [n .. m] OF INTEGER@@ ? Changed line 10 from:
* should open array autocast be marked and to:
* should open array autocast be marked and imported? 2010-06-04 11:19
by -
Changed line 19 from:
* review and confirm convertibility rules for SYSTEM types to:
* review and confirm convertibility rules for @@SYSTEM@@ types 2010-06-04 11:19
by -
Changed lines 1-5 from:
As of June !!!!Lexis * should single line comment be prefixed @@//@@ or @@!!@@ to:
As of June 4, 2010 the following issues are outstanding: Added line 18:
* confirm that single line comment prefix is @@//@@ 2010-06-03 18:28
by -
Deleted lines 8-10:
* no outstanding issues Deleted lines 10-12:
!!!!Type Conversion * no outstanding issues 2010-06-03 18:23
by -
Changed lines 4-5 from:
* should single line comment be prefixed // or !! to:
* should single line comment be prefixed @@//@@ or @@!!@@ Deleted line 6:
Changed lines 16-17 from:
* to:
* no outstanding issues Changed lines 19-20 from:
* should open array autocast be marked and imported to:
* should open array autocast be marked and imported Added lines 25-28:
!!!!Review and Confirm * review and confirm convertibility rules for SYSTEM types * review and confirm removal of usage cases for anonymous types 2010-06-03 18:20
by -
Changed lines 1-2 from:
As of June to:
As of June 3, 2010 the following issues are outstanding: Changed lines 4-5 from:
* should to:
* should single line comment be prefixed // or !! Changed lines 11-12 from:
* to:
* no outstanding issues Changed lines 14-15 from:
* to:
* use [&] for digitCapacity constant? Deleted line 22:
2010-06-02 19:12
by -
Changed lines 11-12 from:
* to:
* is NIL a pervasive or a reserved word? Deleted line 19:
2010-06-02 15:30
by -
Changed line 1 from:
As of to:
As of June 2, 2010 the following issues are outstanding: 2010-05-31 01:24
by -
Changed line 4 from:
* review and to:
* review and confirm removal of usage cases for anonymous types Changed lines 8-9 from:
* review definition of @@NIL@@ to:
* review and confirm definition of @@NIL@@ Changed lines 11-12 from:
* can signatures for @@[ to:
* can signatures for @@[?]@@, @@[!]@@ and @@[FOR]@@ bindings be shared between static and dynamic `ADTs Changed lines 14-15 from:
* review convertibility rules for SYSTEM types to:
* review and confirm convertibility rules for SYSTEM types Changed line 17 from:
* to:
* confirm move of type bound procedure facility from core language to an OO extension layer Changed line 21 from:
* Rick to review [@ComplexMath@] to:
* Rick to review and confirm [@ComplexMath@] 2010-05-30 16:17
by -
Changed line 17 from:
* should type bound procedure facility be in the core language or in an OO extension layer to:
* should the type bound procedure facility be in the core language or in an OO extension layer 2010-05-30 16:16
by -
Added line 4:
* review and possibly reduce the usage cases for anonymous types 2010-05-24 11:37
by -
Changed line 13 from:
* review convertibility to:
* review convertibility rules for SYSTEM types 2010-05-24 11:22
by -
Changed line 20 from:
* to:
* Rick to review [@ComplexMath@] 2010-05-24 11:22
by -
Changed line 20 from:
* to:
* is [[Spec/ComplexMath]] OK now? 2010-05-24 11:17
by -
Added line 16:
* should type bound procedure facility be in the core language or in an OO extension layer 2010-05-24 11:16
by -
Changed lines 14-15 from:
to:
Added line 32:
* define constant for the meta-data (non-digit) overhead in an SXF string, probably in @@COMPILER@@ 2010-05-24 11:14
by -
Added lines 24-27:
!!!!Documentation * detailed description for initialisation order (wiki) * @@FOR..IN@@ loop narrative (wiki and language document) 2010-05-24 11:02
by -
Changed line 22 from:
* complete the Pathnames module to:
* complete the [@Pathnames@] module 2010-05-24 11:01
by -
Deleted line 13:
2010-05-24 10:59
by -
Changed lines 27-28 from:
* binding concatenation to @@+@@ for string `ADTs to:
* binding concatenation to @@+@@ for string `ADTs would be nice to have * binding dot product to @@+@@ for vector `ADTs would be nice to have 2010-05-24 10:58
by -
Changed line 26 from:
* to:
* maybe the @@VAL@@ macro should be removed 2010-05-24 10:58
by -
Changed lines 8-9 from:
to:
Added line 26:
* should the @@VAL@@ macro be removed 2010-05-24 10:56
by -
Changed line 22 from:
* TO DO: @@COROUTINES@@ to:
* TO DO: pseudo module @@COROUTINES@@ 2010-05-24 10:55
by -
Changed lines 21-22 from:
* finalise to:
* finalise semantics for [@Exceptions@] * TO DO: @@COROUTINES@@ 2010-05-24 10:54
by -
Added lines 15-17:
!!!!Procedures * should open array autocast be marked and imported: @@FROM SYSTEM IMPORT AUTOCAST@@ 2010-05-24 10:53
by -
Changed line 1 from:
As of to:
As of May 24, 2010 the following issues are outstanding: 2010-05-24 10:52
by -
Changed lines 10-11 from:
* can signatures for @@[.]@@, @@[!]@@ and @@[FOR]@@ bindings be shared between static and dynamic to:
* can signatures for @@[.]@@, @@[!]@@ and @@[FOR]@@ bindings be shared between static and dynamic `ADTs Changed lines 21-22 from:
* binding concatenation to @@+@@ for string to:
* binding concatenation to @@+@@ for string `ADTs * binding dot product to @@+@@ for vector `ADTs 2010-05-24 10:51
by -
Changed lines 4-6 from:
* to:
* should there be native syntax for subrange types: @@[n .. m] OF INTEGER@@ Changed lines 7-8 from:
* to:
* should the @@VAL@@ macro be removed Changed lines 10-13 from:
* can * where should semantic type specifiers go? @@RECORD@@ * add [@fromCARD@], [@fromINT@], [@fromLONGCARD@], [@fromLONGINT@] to [@[::]@] bindings to:
* can signatures for @@[.]@@, @@[!]@@ and @@[FOR]@@ bindings be shared between static and dynamic ADTs Changed lines 17-20 from:
* * finalise * finalise IO library, in particular [ to:
* review [[Spec/ComplexMath]] * finalise IO library, in particular [@TextIO@] !!!!Keep-in-mind items * binding concatenation to @@+@@ for string ADTs * binding dot product to @@+@@ for vector ADTs 2010-04-21 18:04
by -
Changed line 23 from:
* finalise IO library, in particular to:
* finalise IO library, in particular [@TextIO@] 2010-04-21 18:03
by -
Changed line 23 from:
* finalise IO to:
* finalise IO library, in particular TextIO 2010-04-21 18:02
by -
Changed lines 4-6 from:
* syntax for constructing bitsets to:
* syntax for constructing bitsets, tentatively: @@SET [n]@@ * introduction of builtin associative array, tentatively: yes Changed lines 11-13 from:
* can matrices be handled using V-Type * should collection types be the default, if not, how to mark a type as a collection to:
* can matrices be handled using V-Type? * where should semantic type specifiers go? @@RECORD@@ and @@OPAQUE@@ or module header? 2010-04-21 17:54
by -
Changed line 18 from:
* do we need a constant for the meta-data (non-digit) overhead in an SXF string? where? to:
* do we need a constant for the meta-data (non-digit) overhead in an SXF string? where should it live? 2010-04-21 17:54
by -
Changed line 18 from:
* do we need a constant for the meta-data (non-digit) overhead in an SXF string? to:
* do we need a constant for the meta-data (non-digit) overhead in an SXF string? where? 2010-04-21 17:53
by -
Changed lines 1-2 from:
As of April to:
As of April 22, 2010 the following issues are outstanding: Changed lines 8-9 from:
* to:
* revisit @@VAL@@ function macro Changed lines 18-19 from:
* * finalise procedures to convert to and from intermediate format for scalar values to:
* do we need a constant for the meta-data (non-digit) overhead in an SXF string? 2010-04-15 12:10
by -
Changed line 1 from:
As of April to:
As of April 14, 2010 the following issues are outstanding: 2010-04-15 12:06
by -
Deleted line 10:
Deleted line 11:
2010-04-13 05:12
by -
Changed line 26 from:
* revise to:
* revise [[Spec/ComplexMath]] 2010-04-13 04:33
by -
Changed lines 1-5 from:
As of April !!!!Grammar * replacing @@IMMUTABLE@@ with @@CONST@@, using Oberon-2 semantics to:
As of April 13, 2010 the following issues are outstanding: Deleted line 11:
2010-04-13 03:06
by -
Changed lines 28-29 from:
* finalise @@COMPLEX@@ and @@LONGCOMPLEX@@ to:
* finalise @@COMPLEX@@ and @@LONGCOMPLEX@@ * finalise IO library 2010-04-12 05:50
by -
Changed lines 23-27 from:
* finalise procedures to convert to and from intermediate format for scalar to:
* finalise procedures to convert to and from intermediate format for scalar values !!!!Library * finalise @@BCD@@ and @@LONGBCD@@ * finalise @@COMPLEX@@ and @@LONGCOMPLEX@@ 2010-04-12 05:48
by -
Changed line 23 from:
* to:
* finalise procedures to convert to and from intermediate format for scalar values 2010-04-12 05:47
by -
Changed line 18 from:
* add [@fromCARD@], [@fromINT@], [@fromLONGCARD@], [@fromLONGINT@] to:
* add [@fromCARD@], [@fromINT@], [@fromLONGCARD@], [@fromLONGINT@] to [@[::]@] bindings 2010-04-12 05:46
by -
Changed lines 18-19 from:
to:
* add [@fromCARD@], [@fromINT@], [@fromLONGCARD@], [@fromLONGINT@] conversion bindings Changed line 23 from:
* to:
* 2010-04-12 05:44
by -
Added lines 3-5:
!!!!Grammar * replacing @@IMMUTABLE@@ with @@CONST@@, using Oberon-2 semantics Changed lines 17-22 from:
* should collection types be the default, if not, how to mark a type as a to:
* should collection types be the default, if not, how to mark a type as a collection !!!!Type Conversion * introduction of a [@digitCapacity@] property for scalar types * terminology for the intermediate format used to convert between scalars * 2010-04-12 05:40
by -
Changed lines 13-14 from:
* introduction of * Collections are always opaque to:
* introduction of bindings for collection types * should collection types be the default, if not, how to mark a type as a collection 2010-04-12 05:38
by -
Changed line 8 from:
* introduction of COUNT for to:
* introduction of @@COUNT@@ function for collections 2010-04-12 05:35
by -
Added lines 3-6:
!!!!Types * syntax for constructing bitsets * introduction of builtin associative array Changed lines 8-9 from:
* introduction of to:
* introduction of COUNT for enumerations and collections Changed lines 12-14 from:
* should V-Type allow bindings to @@*@@ and @@/@@ or to:
* should V-Type allow bindings to @@*@@ and @@/@@ or not * introduction of Collection type * Collections are always opaque 2010-04-12 05:31
by -
Changed lines 7-8 from:
* introduction of V-Type to:
* introduction of V-Type * should V-Type allow bindings to @@*@@ and @@/@@ or not 2010-04-12 05:29
by -
Added lines 1-7:
As of April 12, 2010 the following issues are outstanding: !!!!Pervasives * introduction of pervasive COUNT for enumerations and collections !!!!Operator Bindings * introduction of V-Type, bindings for @@*@@ and @@/@@ or not |