17.05.2015 Views

Pascal News

Pascal News

Pascal News

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

Extensions<br />

files that contain files.<br />

Tests 6.6.3.1-5 and 6.6.3.4-2 failed because the current<br />

version of this implementation prohibits passing standard<br />

functions and procedures as parameters.<br />

Test 6.6.5.3-1 failed to assign an already locked tag<br />

field in a variant record, but the standard disallows<br />

such an assignment! (Error in test?)<br />

Test 6.6.5.4-1 failed to pack because of a subscript out<br />

of range. MACC notified.<br />

Test 6.6.6.2-3 failed a nine-digit exp<br />

Univac uses 8 digit floating point.<br />

comparison.<br />

Test 6.6.6.5-2 failed test of ODD function (error with<br />

negative numbers).<br />

Test 6.8.2.4-1 failed because non-local GOTO statements<br />

are not allowed by this implementation.<br />

Test 6.8.3.4-1 failed to compile the "dangling else"<br />

statement, giving an erroneous syntax error.<br />

Tests 6.9.4-1 and 6.9.4-4 failed do unrecoverable I/O error.<br />

Problem referred to MACC.<br />

Test 6.9.4-7 failed to write boolean correctly. UW<br />

right-justifies each boolean in its field; the proposed<br />

ISO standard requires left-justification.<br />

Number of Tests Run:<br />

Deviance Tests<br />

Details of Tests<br />

Test 6.8.3.5-14 shows that an OTHERWISE clause has<br />

implemented in the case stetement.<br />

Number of Deviations Correctly Handled: 77<br />

Number of Deviations Incorrectly Handled: 14<br />

Number of Tests Showing True Extensions: 2<br />

Details £! Extensions<br />

been<br />

Test 6.1.5-6 shows that a lower case e may be used in<br />

real numbers.<br />

Error Handling<br />

Test 6.1.7-11 shows that a null string is accepted by<br />

this implementation.<br />

Details of Incorrect Deviations<br />

as­<br />

Test 6.6.2-5 shows a function declaration without an<br />

signment to the function identifier.<br />

Test 6.8.3.9-4 the for-loop control variable can be modified<br />

by a procedure called within the loop. No error<br />

found by implementation.<br />

Tests 6.8.3.9-9, 6.8.3.9-13 and 6.~.3.9-14 show that a<br />

non-local variable can be used as a for-loop control<br />

variable.<br />

Test 6.9.4-9 shows that a negative field width parameter<br />

in a write statement is accepted. It is mapped to zero.<br />

Test 6.10-1 shows that the implementation substitutes the<br />

default file OUTPUT in the program header. No error message.<br />

Test 6.10-4 shows that the implementation substitutes the<br />

existence of the program statement. We know that the<br />

compiler searched first but found source text (error<br />

correction) •<br />

Tests 6.1.8-5 and 6.6.3.1-4 appear to execute; this occured<br />

after the error corrector made the obvious changes.<br />

Number of Errors Correctly Detected: 29<br />

Number of Error Not Detected: 17<br />

Details of Errors Not Detected<br />

Tests 6.2.1-7, 6.4.3.3-6, 6.4.3.3-7, 6.4.3.3-8 and<br />

6.4.3.3-12 show that the use of an uninitialized variable<br />

is not detected. Variant record fields are not invalidated<br />

when the tag changes. 6.4.3.3-12 incorrectly<br />

printed "PASS" when it should have printed "ERROR NOT<br />

DETECTED" •<br />

Tests 6.2.2-4, 6.3-6, 6.4.1-3 show errors in name scope.<br />

Global values of constants are used even though a local<br />

definition follows; this should cause a compile-time error.<br />

Tests 6.4.5-3, 6.4.5-5 and 6.4.5-13 show that the implementation<br />

considers types that resolve to the same type<br />

to be "equivalent" and can be passed interchangeably to a<br />

procedure.<br />

-0<br />

»<br />

m '"

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!