Skip to content

Conversation

RexJaeschke
Copy link
Contributor

Bill, the only normative change is the addition of the implementation-defined statement w.r.t the max value permitted for a line number. Prior to this edit, that was (implicitly) unspecified; now there is a requirement for an implementation to document it, which the current implementation does.

1. Added missing `PP_` prefix to two grammar rule references.
1. Added imp-def statement re max line number. The MS compiler accepts up to 2147483647, but for values greater than 16707565 it gives the following warning, "CS1687: Source file has exceeded the limit of 16,707,565 lines representable in the PDB, debug information will be incorrect." Any number greater than 16707565 is ignored, and numbering continues from the previous directive (if any).
1. Moved a md code fragment fence.
Clarified the behavior when multiple attributes are used on the same parameter.
@RexJaeschke RexJaeschke requested a review from BillWagner March 22, 2023 11:55
Copy link
Member

@BillWagner BillWagner left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This also looks good to me. I agree with Jon that we should let MD manage the numbers in lists.

@RexJaeschke
Copy link
Contributor Author

FYI, Re the Imp-Def list numbering, all items in the other 3 numbered list in that annex had number 1, but for some unknown reason, this list's items were numbered 1, 2, 3, ..., so when I added a new 2nd item, the web-based editor simply gave it the number 2! C'est la vie!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants