From ajosey@rdg.opengroup.org Tue Jul 25 13:10:01 2000 Received: from mailgate.rdg.opengroup.org (mailgate.rdg.opengroup.org [192.153.166.4]) by dkuug.dk (8.9.2/8.9.2) with SMTP id NAA06106 for ; Tue, 25 Jul 2000 13:10:01 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from ajosey@rdg.opengroup.org) Received: by mailgate.rdg.opengroup.org; id AA01183; Tue, 25 Jul 2000 11:17:33 GMT Received: from skye.rdg.opengroup.org [192.153.166.247] by smtp.opengroup.org via smtpd V1.36 (00/03/29 11:54:16) for ; Tue Jul 25 12:17 BST 2000 Received: (from ajosey@localhost) by skye.rdg.opengroup.org (8.9.3/8.8.7) id MAA02987; Tue, 25 Jul 2000 12:09:50 +0100 Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 12:09:50 +0100 From: Andrew Josey Message-Id: <1000725110949.ZM2986@skye.rdg.opengroup.org> Reply-To: ajosey@rdg.opengroup.org (Andrew Josey) X-Mailer: Z-Mail (5.0.0 30July97) To: prindle@voicenet.com Subject: Finalised PASC 1003.1 Interpretation #109 Cc: stds-pasc-ieee-officers@ieee.org, sc22wg15@dkuug.dk Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii To: Frank Prindle From: Andrew Josey, PASC Interpretations Functional Chair Reference: PASC 1003.1 #109 Dear Mr. Prindle Subject: IEEE Standard 1003.1 Enclosed is the official response for your request for an interpretation of IEEE Standard 1003.1. This response was developed and approved by the members of the 1003.1 Interpretations Committee. To obtain an understanding of the PASC Guidelines for interpretations and their classifications please read http://www.pasc.org/interps/ Please can you confirm receipt of this electronic mail message within ten working days, please carbon copy your response to the IEEE (stds-pasc-ieee-officers@ieee.org) Sincerely, Andrew Josey PASC Functional Chair Interpretations Enclosures Cc: IEEE PASC Officers, SC22 WG15 _____________________________________________________________________________ Notice: This is an unapproved draft PASC interpretation. Use at your own risk. Please direct any questions to a.josey@pasc.org _____________________________________________________________________________ PASC Interpretation reference 1003.1d-99 #109 _____________________________________________________________________________ Interpretation Number: XXXX Topic: return type of mq_timedreceive() Relevant Sections: 15.2.5.1, Page 55, Line 72 of Draft 14 PASC Interpretation Request: ---------------------------- From: Frank Prindle Date: 2000 Jun 13 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 7 Defect Report concerning (number and title of International Standard or DIS final text, if applicable): Advanced Realtime Extensions: IEEE Std 1003.1d-1999 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 8 Qualifier (e.g. error, omission, clarification required): 1 Error=1 , Omission=2, Clarification=3 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 9 References in document (e.g. page, clause, figure, and/or table numbers): Section 15.2.5.1, Page 55, Line 72 of Draft 14 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 10 Nature of defect (complete, concise explanation of the perceived problem): The return type of the new function mq_timedreceive() should be ssize_t, not int. This function was meant to be the functional equivalent of mq_receive() with the addition of a timeout capability. The ballot group failed to notice that the return type from the function was different from the original untimed function. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 11 Solution proposed by the submitter (optional): Change "int" in the synopsis line to "ssize_t". ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Interpretation response ------------------------ The standards states that the return type for function mq_timedreceive() should be int, and conforming implementations must conform to this. However, concerns have been raised about this which are being referred to the sponsor. Rationale ------------- The return type is inconsistent with mq_receive(). Notes to project editor (not part of the interpretation): ------------------------ This should be fixed as in section 11. Forwarded to Interpretations group: 13 June 2000 Proposed resolution: 13 June 2000 Finalised Interpretation: 25 July 2000