issues in LRM sections 9.5.3, 9.5.4, and 9.5.5

Hi All,

Upon reading the contents of the sections 9.5.3, 9.5.4, and 9.5.5 in the 2.3.1 LRM I've found a few items where I think we can improve:

9.5.3: In the second paragraph, just below the syntax box twice the phrase "family of tasks" is used. To me this implies that there are more system tasks like $swrite, but they are not mentioned here. A reference is made to the $fwrite family of tasks but in the section 9.5.2 they are not mentioned - $fwrite appears in company of $fdisplay, $fstrobe, $smonitor, and $fdebug. Instead, the $fwrite family of tasks refers to the $fwrite, $fwriteb, $fwriteh, and $fwriteo tasks. To prevent confusion the phrase "family of tasks" should be replaced by "task" and the sentence should be adjusted to match the singular form.

9.5.4: In subsection 9.5.4.2 at the bottom of page 206, a descriptor is mentioned with the character c. In the list at the top of the next page (207), this character is not mentioned at all. This is a significant omission as it is not clear whether the receiving variable for such a descriptor should be a string variable, an integer variable or any of the two.

9.5.5: Twice a reference is made to $ungetc while this system task is not mentioned anywhere else in the LRM except in the overview table 9-2 on page 194. I would also like to know why there is a restriction for using the $fgetc function and $ungetc task from the analog context. This seems rather arbitrary to me, and limits the ability to read textual data from file for detailed processing. I would suggest to support $ungetc and $fgetc in the analog context as well. Otherwise, a reference to $ungetc in the 1364-2005 or 1800-2009 standard might be relevant.

Cheers,
Marq

Marq Kole
Product Manager AMSRF Simulation
NXP Semiconductors / Central R&D / Foundation Technology

-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.