@@ -13138,7 +13138,7 @@ \subsection{Function Invocation}
13138
13138
returns the \FALSE{} object,
13139
13139
as must all further calls.
13140
13140
In this situation, the outcome of invoking \code{current} is undefined
13141
- ( \commentary{e.g., it could throw or return a default value}) .
13141
+ \commentary{( e.g., it could throw or return a default value)} .
13142
13142
\item
13143
13143
If it throws an exception object $e$ and stack trace $t$ then
13144
13144
the current invocation of \code{moveNext()} throws $e$ and $t$ as well.
@@ -15754,7 +15754,7 @@ \subsubsection{Instance Method Closurization}
15754
15754
The corresponding actual argument in the body is replaced by
15755
15755
\code{$p_j$\,\,\AS\,\,$T'_j$}
15756
15756
where $T'_j$ is the type which would be $T_j$ if $p_j$ had not been covariant
15757
- ( \commentary{that is, it is computed as specified below}) .
15757
+ \commentary{( that is, it is computed as specified below)} .
15758
15758
15759
15759
\commentary{%
15760
15760
This is concerned with the dynamic type of the function object obtained by
@@ -15768,7 +15768,7 @@ \subsubsection{Instance Method Closurization}
15768
15768
15769
15769
\LMHash{}%
15770
15770
Otherwise
15771
- ( \commentary{when $p_j$ is not covariant}) ,
15771
+ \commentary{( when $p_j$ is not covariant)} ,
15772
15772
if $T$ is a non-generic class then for $j \in 1 .. n+k$,
15773
15773
$T_j$ is a type annotation that denotes the same type
15774
15774
(\ref{typeType})
@@ -15920,7 +15920,7 @@ \subsubsection{Super Closurization}
15920
15920
The corresponding actual argument in the body is replaced by
15921
15921
\code{$p_j$\,\,\AS\,\,$T'_j$}
15922
15922
where $T'_j$ is the type which would be $T_j$ if $p_j$ had not been covariant
15923
- ( \commentary{that is, it is computed as specified below}) .
15923
+ \commentary{( that is, it is computed as specified below)} .
15924
15924
15925
15925
\commentary{%
15926
15926
This is concerned with the dynamic type of the function object obtained by
@@ -15934,7 +15934,7 @@ \subsubsection{Super Closurization}
15934
15934
15935
15935
\LMHash{}%
15936
15936
Otherwise
15937
- ( \commentary{when $p_j$ is not covariant}) ,
15937
+ \commentary{( when $p_j$ is not covariant)} ,
15938
15938
if $S$ is a non-generic class then for $j \in 1 .. n+k$,
15939
15939
$T_j$ is a type annotation that denotes the same type
15940
15940
(\ref{typeType})
@@ -16249,9 +16249,9 @@ \subsection{Null Shorting}
16249
16249
\LMHash{}%
16250
16250
We use the phrase null-shorting as an adjective in order to
16251
16251
indicate the connections between null shorting and other concepts
16252
- ( \commentary{%
16253
- e.g., ``the null-shorting translation is used during null shorting''%
16254
- }) .
16252
+ \commentary{%
16253
+ ( e.g., ``the null-shorting translation is used during null shorting'') %
16254
+ }.
16255
16255
16256
16256
\commentary{%
16257
16257
Let $e$ be an expression of the form
@@ -16293,7 +16293,7 @@ \subsection{Null Shorting}
16293
16293
\metaCode{fn[x:\,\,Exp]:\,\,Exp\,\,=>\,\,E}
16294
16294
defines a meta-level function of type
16295
16295
\metaCode{Exp\,\,$\rightarrow$\,\,Exp}
16296
- ( \commentary{that is, a function from expressions to expressions}) ,
16296
+ \commentary{( that is, a function from expressions to expressions)} ,
16297
16297
and
16298
16298
\metaCode{fn[k:\,\,Exp\,\,$\rightarrow$\,\,Exp]:\,\,Exp\,\,=>\,\,E}
16299
16299
defines a meta-level function of type
@@ -19499,7 +19499,7 @@ \subsection{If}
19499
19499
19500
19500
\LMHash{}%
19501
19501
Consider an \IF{} statement of any of the forms mentioned above
19502
- ( \commentary{the statement then starts with \code{\IF\,\,($e$)}}) .
19502
+ \commentary{( the statement then starts with \code{\IF\,\,($e$)})} .
19503
19503
It is a \Error{compile-time error} if the type of the expression $e$
19504
19504
is not assignable to \code{bool}.
19505
19505
@@ -22903,7 +22903,7 @@ \subsection{Subtypes}
22903
22903
22904
22904
\LMHash{}%
22905
22905
Intersection types
22906
- ( \commentary{types of the form \code{$X$\,\&\,$S$}}) ,
22906
+ \commentary{( types of the form \code{$X$\,\&\,$S$})} ,
22907
22907
may arise during static analysis due to type promotion
22908
22908
(\ref{typePromotion}).
22909
22909
They never occur during execution,
@@ -24583,10 +24583,10 @@ \subsection{Standard Upper Bounds and Standard Lower Bounds}
24583
24583
\item Each $B_{1i}$ and $B_{2i}$ are types with the same canonical syntax.
24584
24584
\item For each required entry named $n$ in $\metavar{Named}_1$,
24585
24585
$\metavar{Named}_2$ contains an entry named $n$
24586
- ( \commentary{which may or may not be required}) .
24586
+ \commentary{( which may or may not be required)} .
24587
24587
\item For each required entry named $n$ in $\metavar{Named}_2$,
24588
24588
$\metavar{Named}_1$ contains an entry named $n$
24589
- ( \commentary{which may or may not be required}) .
24589
+ \commentary{( which may or may not be required)} .
24590
24590
\end{itemize}
24591
24591
24592
24592
Then \DefEqualsNewline{\UpperBoundType{$U_1$}{$U_2$}}{%
@@ -26654,9 +26654,9 @@ \subsection{Type Promotion}
26654
26654
(\ref{localVariableDeclaration}).
26655
26655
This is the stack of types of interest
26656
26656
for the declaring occurrence of the name of $v$
26657
- ( \commentary{%
26658
- i.e., the very first time the variable is mentioned, \ref{variables}%
26659
- }) .
26657
+ \commentary{%
26658
+ ( i.e., the very first time the variable is mentioned, \ref{variables}) %
26659
+ }.
26660
26660
26661
26661
\LMHash{}%
26662
26662
If a local variable $v$ has an initializing expression
@@ -26961,9 +26961,9 @@ \section*{Appendix: Algorithmic Subtyping}
26961
26961
The algorithm must be performed such that the first case that matches
26962
26962
is always the case which is performed.
26963
26963
The algorithm produces results which are both positive and negative
26964
- ( \commentary{%
26965
- that is, in some situations the subtype relation is determined to be false%
26966
- }) ,
26964
+ \commentary{%
26965
+ ( that is, in some situations the subtype relation is determined to be false) %
26966
+ },
26967
26967
which is important for performance because
26968
26968
it is then unnecessary to consider any subsequent cases.
26969
26969
@@ -27010,9 +27010,9 @@ \section*{Appendix: Algorithmic Subtyping}
27010
27010
\item
27011
27011
if $T_0$ is \code{Null}, \DYNAMIC, \VOID, or \code{$S$?} for any $S$,
27012
27012
then the subtyping does not hold
27013
- ( \commentary{%
27014
- i.e., the result of the subtyping query is known to be false%
27015
- }) .
27013
+ \commentary{%
27014
+ ( i.e., the result of the subtyping query is known to be false) %
27015
+ }.
27016
27016
\item
27017
27017
Otherwise \SubtypeNE{T_0}{T_1} is true.
27018
27018
\end{itemize}
0 commit comments