To: J3 08-117 From: Bill Long Subject: UTI 148, bit sequence arguments Date: 2008 January 25 References: J3/08-007 Discussion for UTI 148, page 345: The editor objects that DBLE and CMPLX were omitted from the discussion of padding or truncation of boz arguments even though boz arguments are legal for those functions. However, the results of those functions are in terms of references to REAL, so the rules for REAL would apply. A Note is added to clarify this. The editor also notes that "considered to be" is vague. A similar situation on page 156, discussing padding character values, uses the phrase "treated as if", which seems better. Finally, the title of the subclause could be shortened to be more parallel to the previous subclause. Edits to J3/08-007: [345:23] In the title to 13.3.3 Interpretation of bit sequences... replace "Interpretation of bit" with "Bit". [345:26-27] In the first bullet of 13.3.3 Interpretation of bit sequences..., replace " is treated as if it were extended". [345:30-31] In the second bullet of 13.3.3 Interpretation of bit sequences..., replace " is treated as if it were truncated". [345:31+] At the end of "13.3.3 Interpretation of bit seqeunces..." add a Note: "Note 13.2a The result values of the intrinsic functions DBLE and CMPLX are defined by references to REAL with the same arguments. Therefore, the padding and truncation of arguments to those functions is the same as for REAL." [end Note]