errorsandtypos.htm

This ECMA Standard specifies the form and establishes the interpretation of programs written in the

<a href="9.5.4.htm">9.5.4</a> Conditional compilation directives. 
</br>
The grammar production for the non-terminal <i>pp-if-section</i>
is on two lines. The <br>
<i>section</i><sub>opt</sub> 
<br>is really part of the previous line.
</p>

<p>
<a href="9.5.4.htm">9.5.4</a> Conditional compilation directives. 
</br>
The grammar production for the non-terminal <i>pp-elif-section</i>
is on two lines. The <br>
<i>section</i><sub>opt</sub> 
<br>is really part of the previous line.
</p>

<p>
<a href="9.6.5.htm">9.5.4</a> Condititional compilation directives
</br>
Pedantically, the code examples need ... for ellision.
</p>

<p>
<a href="12.1.1.htm">12.1.1</a> Static variables.
</br>
Paragraph 1, sentence 2. The sentence ends with two full stops.
</p>

<p>
<a href="12.3.3.htm">12.3.3</a> Precise rules for determining definite assignment. 
</br>
Paragraph 2, sentence 12. Sentence reads</br>
"...the state of a variable <i>the</i> isn't definitely...". I think it should be this instead: </br>
"...the state of a variable <i>that</i> isn't definitely...".
</p>

<p>
<a href="14.2.2.htm">14.2.2</a> Operator overloading. 
</br>
Paragraph 9.
[Note:While... should be 
[Note: While...
</p>

<p>
<a href="14.5.4.1.htm">14.5.4.1</a> Identical simple names and type names
</br>
In the example code, there are three // comments that spill over to the 
next line.
</p>

<p>
<a href="14.9.6.htm">14.9.6</a> Reference type equality operators. 
</br>
Paragraph 5.
In the code example, the keyword <b>using</b> starts with an uppercase U.
</p>

<p>
<a href="14.9.7.htm">14.9.7</a> String equality operators. 
</br>
Paragraph 1, sentence 1. Ends in two colons rather than one colon.
</p>

<p>
<a href="17.2.6.2.htm">17.2.6.2</a> Declared accessibility. 
</br>
Paragraph 1, sentence 1 reads</br>
"Non-nested types can have public or internal declared accessibility and
they internal declared accessibility by default."</br>
Should this be...</br>
"Non-nested types can have public or internal declared accessibility and
they <i>have</i> internal declared accessibility by default."</br>
</p>

<p>
<a href="17.4.htm">17.4</a> Fields. 
</br>
The last sentence of the 2nd paragraph is duplicated.
</p>

<p>
<a href="17.4.3.htm">17.4.3</a> Volatile fields. 
</br>
Paragraph 2. 
In the example, the sentence reads "Since result has been
declared volatile...". However, in the code result is <i>not</i>
declared as a volatile field. 
</p>

<p>
<a href="17.6.2.htm">17.6.2</a> Accessors
</br>
The last code example, shows a fragment of the Console
class and should really include ... for ellision (note that
the static Console calls to the OpenStandardXXXX).
</p>

<p>
<a href="17.7.htm">17.7</a> Events. 
</br>
The grammar production for the non-terminal <i>event-declaration</i>
is on two lines. The <br>
<b>}</b> 
<br>on its own line is really part of the previous line.
</p>

<p>
<a href="17.9.1.htm">17.9.1</a> Unary operators. 
</br>
Paragraph 3.
In the code example, Main does not have a closing right brace. 
</p>

<p>
<a href="17.10.3.htm">17.10.3</a> Constructor execution. 
</br>
Paragraph 1.
An [Example: is started within an [Example:
</p>

<p>
<a href="18.4.1.htm">18.4.1</a> Database integer type. 
</br>
// Many comments have spilled into two lines.
</p>

<p>
<a href="18.4.2.htm">18.4.2</a> Database boolean type.
</br>
// Many comments have spilled into two lines.
</p>

<p>
<a href="20.1.htm">20.1</a> Interface declarations. 
</br>
The grammar production for the non-terminal <i>interface-declaration</i>
is on two lines. The <br>
<b>;</b><sub>opt</sub> 
<br>on its own line is really part of the previous line
</p>

<p>
<a href="22.1.htm">22.1</a> Delegate declarations. 
</br>
The grammar production for the non-terminal <i>delegate-declaration</i>
is on two lines. The <br>
<b>(</b> <i>formal-parameter-list</i><sub>opt</sub> <b>) ;</b> 
<br>
on is really part of the previous line.
</p>

<p>
<a href="25.1.htm">25.1</a> Unsafe contexts. 
</br>
Why is the [Example: after the grammar production in a list bullet?
</p>

<p>
<a href="25.6.htm">25.6</a> The fixed statement. 
</br>
Paragraph 5, sentence 2. 
possible.[Example:
should be
possible. [Example:
</p>

<p>
<a href="25.8.htm">25.8</a> Dynamic memory allocation. 
</br>
A // comment has spilled into two lines. 
</p>

<p>
B.3 Unspecified behavior. 
</br>
floator 
should be 
float or
</p>

<p>
C.10 Properties. 
</br>
Sudden change of font.
</p>

<h2>Notes</h2>

<p>
There are numerous cases where examples have not been written inside an
[Example: ... end example] and notes have not been written inside a
[Note: ... end note]. 
This means they are normative rather than
informative as specified in <a href="7.htm">7</a>.
Eg., <a href="14.5.2.1.htm">14.5.2.1</a>, 
the first sentence is normative, the second sentence should be in a 
[Note: ... end note],
the third and fourth sentences should be in an
[Example: ... end example] (they even use the
word example), the fifth sentence should be in a 
[Note: ... end note] (it uses the word note).
In contrast, the last sentence <i>is</i> labelled as an
informative [Example: ... end example]
</p>


<p>
<a href="10.6.htm">10.6</a> Signatures and overloading. 
</br>
Paragraph 1, sentence 2 says that the ref and out parameter modifiers 
are part of a methods signature. The example in paragraph 2 shows
F(ref int) and F(out int) overloading each other.
The Microsoft C# compiler does not allow F(ref int) and F(out int) to
overload each other.
</p>

<p>
<a href="10.7.htm">10.7</a> Scopes. 
</br>
Paragraph 3. One sentence in the [Note: reads "... possibly leading to
compile-time errors if the statements of the block were later to be
rearranged." I cannot see how any rearrangement would lead to a 
compile-time error.
</p>

<p>
<a href="11.1.3.htm">11.1.3</a> Simple Types. 
</br>
The second list item (paragraph 3, sentence 5) reads 
"When the operands of an expression
are all simple type constants it is <i>possible</i> for the 
compiler to evaluate the expression at compile time. Such an
expression is known as a constant expression". It is not
only possible it is required by 
<a href="14.15.htm">14.15</a> paragraph 3, sentence 1: 
"Whenever an expression
is of one of the types listed above and contains only the
constructs listed above, the expression <i>is</i> evaluated
at compile-time.
</p>

<p>
<a href="11.1.6.htm">11.1.6</a> The decimal type. 
</br>
Paragraph 1, sentence 1. What is the difference between  financial and
a monetary calculation?
</p>

<p>
<a href="23.htm">23</a> Exceptions
</br>
2nd bullet, 2nd sentence claims "Such code is difficult to write
in C++ without duplicating code." Should the C# language spec 
be mentioning C++ like this? 
(regardless of whether the sentence is true, which is debatable).
</p>

<p>
<a href="24.2.htm">24.2</a> Attributes
</br>
Paragraph 7, sentence 4</br>
"If the attribute-name is spelled using a verbatim identifier, 
then only an attribute without a suffix is matched, thus enabling 
such an ambiguity to be resolved".</br>
This requirement is not in the C# Language spec from Microsoft and
is not currently supported by the Microsoft C# compiler.
</p>

<span class="ruler"></span>
<table>
  <tr> 
    <td>
    <table align="left" bgcolor="navy">
      <tr bgcolor="navy">
      <td>
      <font face="Arial,sans-serif" size="6" color="yellow">
      <strong>{ JSL }</strong>
      </font>
      </td>
      </tr>
    </table>
    </td>
  </tr>
  <tr>
    <td>
    <font face="Arial,sans-serif" size="2" color="navy">
       <strong>Jagger Software Ltd</strong>
    </font>
    </td>
  </tr>
  <tr>
    <td>
      <font face="Arial,sans-serif" size="2" color="navy">
        <strong>Company # 4070126</strong>
      </font>
    </td>
  </tr>
  <tr>
    <td>
      <font face="Arial,sans-serif" size="2" color="navy">
        <strong>VAT # 762 5213 42</strong>
      </font>
    </td>
  </tr>
</table>

<img src="valid-html401.png" align="left" height="31" width="88" alt="Valid HTML 4.01"/>
<img src="vcss.gif" align="left" height="31" width="88" alt="Valid CSS"/>

</body>
</html>