@@ -13150,7 +13150,7 @@ \subsection{Function Invocation}
13150
13150
returns the \FALSE{} object,
13151
13151
as must all further calls.
13152
13152
In this situation, the outcome of invoking \code{current} is undefined
13153
- ( \commentary{e.g., it could throw or return a default value}) .
13153
+ \commentary{( e.g., it could throw or return a default value)} .
13154
13154
\item
13155
13155
If it throws an exception object $e$ and stack trace $t$ then
13156
13156
the current invocation of \code{moveNext()} throws $e$ and $t$ as well.
@@ -15766,7 +15766,7 @@ \subsubsection{Instance Method Closurization}
15766
15766
The corresponding actual argument in the body is replaced by
15767
15767
\code{$p_j$\,\,\AS\,\,$T'_j$}
15768
15768
where $T'_j$ is the type which would be $T_j$ if $p_j$ had not been covariant
15769
- ( \commentary{that is, it is computed as specified below}) .
15769
+ \commentary{( that is, it is computed as specified below)} .
15770
15770
15771
15771
\commentary{%
15772
15772
This is concerned with the dynamic type of the function object obtained by
@@ -15780,7 +15780,7 @@ \subsubsection{Instance Method Closurization}
15780
15780
15781
15781
\LMHash{}%
15782
15782
Otherwise
15783
- ( \commentary{when $p_j$ is not covariant}) ,
15783
+ \commentary{( when $p_j$ is not covariant)} ,
15784
15784
if $T$ is a non-generic class then for $j \in 1 .. n+k$,
15785
15785
$T_j$ is a type annotation that denotes the same type
15786
15786
(\ref{typeType})
@@ -15932,7 +15932,7 @@ \subsubsection{Super Closurization}
15932
15932
The corresponding actual argument in the body is replaced by
15933
15933
\code{$p_j$\,\,\AS\,\,$T'_j$}
15934
15934
where $T'_j$ is the type which would be $T_j$ if $p_j$ had not been covariant
15935
- ( \commentary{that is, it is computed as specified below}) .
15935
+ \commentary{( that is, it is computed as specified below)} .
15936
15936
15937
15937
\commentary{%
15938
15938
This is concerned with the dynamic type of the function object obtained by
@@ -15946,7 +15946,7 @@ \subsubsection{Super Closurization}
15946
15946
15947
15947
\LMHash{}%
15948
15948
Otherwise
15949
- ( \commentary{when $p_j$ is not covariant}) ,
15949
+ \commentary{( when $p_j$ is not covariant)} ,
15950
15950
if $S$ is a non-generic class then for $j \in 1 .. n+k$,
15951
15951
$T_j$ is a type annotation that denotes the same type
15952
15952
(\ref{typeType})
@@ -16261,9 +16261,9 @@ \subsection{Null Shorting}
16261
16261
\LMHash{}%
16262
16262
We use the phrase null-shorting as an adjective in order to
16263
16263
indicate the connections between null shorting and other concepts
16264
- ( \commentary{%
16265
- e.g., ``the null-shorting translation is used during null shorting''%
16266
- }) .
16264
+ \commentary{%
16265
+ ( e.g., ``the null-shorting translation is used during null shorting'') %
16266
+ }.
16267
16267
16268
16268
\commentary{%
16269
16269
Let $e$ be an expression of the form
@@ -16305,7 +16305,7 @@ \subsection{Null Shorting}
16305
16305
\metaCode{fn[x:\,\,Exp]:\,\,Exp\,\,=>\,\,E}
16306
16306
defines a meta-level function of type
16307
16307
\metaCode{Exp\,\,$\rightarrow$\,\,Exp}
16308
- ( \commentary{that is, a function from expressions to expressions}) ,
16308
+ \commentary{( that is, a function from expressions to expressions)} ,
16309
16309
and
16310
16310
\metaCode{fn[k:\,\,Exp\,\,$\rightarrow$\,\,Exp]:\,\,Exp\,\,=>\,\,E}
16311
16311
defines a meta-level function of type
@@ -19511,7 +19511,7 @@ \subsection{If}
19511
19511
19512
19512
\LMHash{}%
19513
19513
Consider an \IF{} statement of any of the forms mentioned above
19514
- ( \commentary{the statement then starts with \code{\IF\,\,($e$)}}) .
19514
+ \commentary{( the statement then starts with \code{\IF\,\,($e$)})} .
19515
19515
It is a \Error{compile-time error} if the type of the expression $e$
19516
19516
is not assignable to \code{bool}.
19517
19517
@@ -22915,7 +22915,7 @@ \subsection{Subtypes}
22915
22915
22916
22916
\LMHash{}%
22917
22917
Intersection types
22918
- ( \commentary{types of the form \code{$X$\,\&\,$S$}}) ,
22918
+ \commentary{( types of the form \code{$X$\,\&\,$S$})} ,
22919
22919
may arise during static analysis due to type promotion
22920
22920
(\ref{typePromotion}).
22921
22921
They never occur during execution,
@@ -24595,10 +24595,10 @@ \subsection{Standard Upper Bounds and Standard Lower Bounds}
24595
24595
\item Each $B_{1i}$ and $B_{2i}$ are types with the same canonical syntax.
24596
24596
\item For each required entry named $n$ in $\metavar{Named}_1$,
24597
24597
$\metavar{Named}_2$ contains an entry named $n$
24598
- ( \commentary{which may or may not be required}) .
24598
+ \commentary{( which may or may not be required)} .
24599
24599
\item For each required entry named $n$ in $\metavar{Named}_2$,
24600
24600
$\metavar{Named}_1$ contains an entry named $n$
24601
- ( \commentary{which may or may not be required}) .
24601
+ \commentary{( which may or may not be required)} .
24602
24602
\end{itemize}
24603
24603
24604
24604
Then \DefEqualsNewline{\UpperBoundType{$U_1$}{$U_2$}}{%
@@ -26666,9 +26666,9 @@ \subsection{Type Promotion}
26666
26666
(\ref{localVariableDeclaration}).
26667
26667
This is the stack of types of interest
26668
26668
for the declaring occurrence of the name of $v$
26669
- ( \commentary{%
26670
- i.e., the very first time the variable is mentioned, \ref{variables}%
26671
- }) .
26669
+ \commentary{%
26670
+ ( i.e., the very first time the variable is mentioned, \ref{variables}) %
26671
+ }.
26672
26672
26673
26673
\LMHash{}%
26674
26674
If a local variable $v$ has an initializing expression
@@ -26973,9 +26973,9 @@ \section*{Appendix: Algorithmic Subtyping}
26973
26973
The algorithm must be performed such that the first case that matches
26974
26974
is always the case which is performed.
26975
26975
The algorithm produces results which are both positive and negative
26976
- ( \commentary{%
26977
- that is, in some situations the subtype relation is determined to be false%
26978
- }) ,
26976
+ \commentary{%
26977
+ ( that is, in some situations the subtype relation is determined to be false) %
26978
+ },
26979
26979
which is important for performance because
26980
26980
it is then unnecessary to consider any subsequent cases.
26981
26981
@@ -27022,9 +27022,9 @@ \section*{Appendix: Algorithmic Subtyping}
27022
27022
\item
27023
27023
if $T_0$ is \code{Null}, \DYNAMIC, \VOID, or \code{$S$?} for any $S$,
27024
27024
then the subtyping does not hold
27025
- ( \commentary{%
27026
- i.e., the result of the subtyping query is known to be false%
27027
- }) .
27025
+ \commentary{%
27026
+ ( i.e., the result of the subtyping query is known to be false) %
27027
+ }.
27028
27028
\item
27029
27029
Otherwise \SubtypeNE{T_0}{T_1} is true.
27030
27030
\end{itemize}
0 commit comments