@@ -13134,7 +13134,7 @@ \subsection{Function Invocation}
13134
13134
returns the \FALSE{} object,
13135
13135
as must all further calls.
13136
13136
In this situation, the outcome of invoking \code{current} is undefined
13137
- ( \commentary{e.g., it could throw or return a default value}) .
13137
+ \commentary{( e.g., it could throw or return a default value)} .
13138
13138
\item
13139
13139
If it throws an exception object $e$ and stack trace $t$ then
13140
13140
the current invocation of \code{moveNext()} throws $e$ and $t$ as well.
@@ -15750,7 +15750,7 @@ \subsubsection{Instance Method Closurization}
15750
15750
The corresponding actual argument in the body is replaced by
15751
15751
\code{$p_j$\,\,\AS\,\,$T'_j$}
15752
15752
where $T'_j$ is the type which would be $T_j$ if $p_j$ had not been covariant
15753
- ( \commentary{that is, it is computed as specified below}) .
15753
+ \commentary{( that is, it is computed as specified below)} .
15754
15754
15755
15755
\commentary{%
15756
15756
This is concerned with the dynamic type of the function object obtained by
@@ -15764,7 +15764,7 @@ \subsubsection{Instance Method Closurization}
15764
15764
15765
15765
\LMHash{}%
15766
15766
Otherwise
15767
- ( \commentary{when $p_j$ is not covariant}) ,
15767
+ \commentary{( when $p_j$ is not covariant)} ,
15768
15768
if $T$ is a non-generic class then for $j \in 1 .. n+k$,
15769
15769
$T_j$ is a type annotation that denotes the same type
15770
15770
(\ref{typeType})
@@ -15916,7 +15916,7 @@ \subsubsection{Super Closurization}
15916
15916
The corresponding actual argument in the body is replaced by
15917
15917
\code{$p_j$\,\,\AS\,\,$T'_j$}
15918
15918
where $T'_j$ is the type which would be $T_j$ if $p_j$ had not been covariant
15919
- ( \commentary{that is, it is computed as specified below}) .
15919
+ \commentary{( that is, it is computed as specified below)} .
15920
15920
15921
15921
\commentary{%
15922
15922
This is concerned with the dynamic type of the function object obtained by
@@ -15930,7 +15930,7 @@ \subsubsection{Super Closurization}
15930
15930
15931
15931
\LMHash{}%
15932
15932
Otherwise
15933
- ( \commentary{when $p_j$ is not covariant}) ,
15933
+ \commentary{( when $p_j$ is not covariant)} ,
15934
15934
if $S$ is a non-generic class then for $j \in 1 .. n+k$,
15935
15935
$T_j$ is a type annotation that denotes the same type
15936
15936
(\ref{typeType})
@@ -16245,9 +16245,9 @@ \subsection{Null Shorting}
16245
16245
\LMHash{}%
16246
16246
We use the phrase null-shorting as an adjective in order to
16247
16247
indicate the connections between null shorting and other concepts
16248
- ( \commentary{%
16249
- e.g., ``the null-shorting translation is used during null shorting''%
16250
- }) .
16248
+ \commentary{%
16249
+ ( e.g., ``the null-shorting translation is used during null shorting'') %
16250
+ }.
16251
16251
16252
16252
\commentary{%
16253
16253
Let $e$ be an expression of the form
@@ -16289,7 +16289,7 @@ \subsection{Null Shorting}
16289
16289
\metaCode{fn[x:\,\,Exp]:\,\,Exp\,\,=>\,\,E}
16290
16290
defines a meta-level function of type
16291
16291
\metaCode{Exp\,\,$\rightarrow$\,\,Exp}
16292
- ( \commentary{that is, a function from expressions to expressions}) ,
16292
+ \commentary{( that is, a function from expressions to expressions)} ,
16293
16293
and
16294
16294
\metaCode{fn[k:\,\,Exp\,\,$\rightarrow$\,\,Exp]:\,\,Exp\,\,=>\,\,E}
16295
16295
defines a meta-level function of type
@@ -19495,7 +19495,7 @@ \subsection{If}
19495
19495
19496
19496
\LMHash{}%
19497
19497
Consider an \IF{} statement of any of the forms mentioned above
19498
- ( \commentary{the statement then starts with \code{\IF\,\,($e$)}}) .
19498
+ \commentary{( the statement then starts with \code{\IF\,\,($e$)})} .
19499
19499
It is a \Error{compile-time error} if the type of the expression $e$
19500
19500
is not assignable to \code{bool}.
19501
19501
@@ -22899,7 +22899,7 @@ \subsection{Subtypes}
22899
22899
22900
22900
\LMHash{}%
22901
22901
Intersection types
22902
- ( \commentary{types of the form \code{$X$\,\&\,$S$}}) ,
22902
+ \commentary{( types of the form \code{$X$\,\&\,$S$})} ,
22903
22903
may arise during static analysis due to type promotion
22904
22904
(\ref{typePromotion}).
22905
22905
They never occur during execution,
@@ -24579,10 +24579,10 @@ \subsection{Standard Upper Bounds and Standard Lower Bounds}
24579
24579
\item Each $B_{1i}$ and $B_{2i}$ are types with the same canonical syntax.
24580
24580
\item For each required entry named $n$ in $\metavar{Named}_1$,
24581
24581
$\metavar{Named}_2$ contains an entry named $n$
24582
- ( \commentary{which may or may not be required}) .
24582
+ \commentary{( which may or may not be required)} .
24583
24583
\item For each required entry named $n$ in $\metavar{Named}_2$,
24584
24584
$\metavar{Named}_1$ contains an entry named $n$
24585
- ( \commentary{which may or may not be required}) .
24585
+ \commentary{( which may or may not be required)} .
24586
24586
\end{itemize}
24587
24587
24588
24588
Then \DefEqualsNewline{\UpperBoundType{$U_1$}{$U_2$}}{%
@@ -26636,9 +26636,9 @@ \subsection{Type Promotion}
26636
26636
(\ref{localVariableDeclaration}).
26637
26637
This is the stack of types of interest
26638
26638
for the declaring occurrence of the name of $v$
26639
- ( \commentary{%
26640
- i.e., the very first time the variable is mentioned, \ref{variables}%
26641
- }) .
26639
+ \commentary{%
26640
+ ( i.e., the very first time the variable is mentioned, \ref{variables}) %
26641
+ }.
26642
26642
26643
26643
\LMHash{}%
26644
26644
If a local variable $v$ has an initializing expression
@@ -26943,9 +26943,9 @@ \section*{Appendix: Algorithmic Subtyping}
26943
26943
The algorithm must be performed such that the first case that matches
26944
26944
is always the case which is performed.
26945
26945
The algorithm produces results which are both positive and negative
26946
- ( \commentary{%
26947
- that is, in some situations the subtype relation is determined to be false%
26948
- }) ,
26946
+ \commentary{%
26947
+ ( that is, in some situations the subtype relation is determined to be false) %
26948
+ },
26949
26949
which is important for performance because
26950
26950
it is then unnecessary to consider any subsequent cases.
26951
26951
@@ -26992,9 +26992,9 @@ \section*{Appendix: Algorithmic Subtyping}
26992
26992
\item
26993
26993
if $T_0$ is \code{Null}, \DYNAMIC, \VOID, or \code{$S$?} for any $S$,
26994
26994
then the subtyping does not hold
26995
- ( \commentary{%
26996
- i.e., the result of the subtyping query is known to be false%
26997
- }) .
26995
+ \commentary{%
26996
+ ( i.e., the result of the subtyping query is known to be false) %
26997
+ }.
26998
26998
\item
26999
26999
Otherwise \SubtypeNE{T_0}{T_1} is true.
27000
27000
\end{itemize}
0 commit comments