Issue 12362: Section: 8.4.7 (qvt-rtf)
Source:  (, )
Nature: Revision
Severity: Minor
Summary: The grammar rule used to produce a forExp doesn't coincide with the notation specified in the abstract syntax section for it (Pag 89, Section 8.2.2.6). The rule production in the grammar is wrong. Suggestion: Change the production rule: <for_exp> ::= ('forEach' | 'forOne') '(' <iter_declarator_list> ('|' <expression> )? ')' <expression_block> 

Resolution: 
Revised Text: Revised Text:
In Section 8.2.2.6, at the end of the "Notation" sub-section add 
the following text. 
""" 
When using a forEach expression in conjunction with a compute expression 
the following shorthand can be used: 
  mylist->forEach(i;x:X=...|cond) { … } 
This is equivalent to: 
  compute (x:X=...) mylist->forEach(i|cond) { … } 
This is similar to the shorthand notation for while expression (see 8.2.2.4). 
"""

Actions taken:
April 1, 2008: received issue
April 26, 2010: closed issue
Discussion: 
The intent of syntax rule: 
<for_exp> ::= ('forEach' | 'forOne') '(' <iter_declarator_list> (';' <declarator>)? ('|' <expression>)? ')' <expression_block> 
was to allow shorthand with the computeExp 
compute (x:X) mylist->forEach(i|cond) { … } 
<==> mylist->forEach(i;x|cond) { … } 
Similarly with what happens with While expression. 
However the explanation was missing in the notation sub-section. 

End of Annotations:=====

m: webmaster@omg.org
Date: 01 Apr 2008 04:49:14 -0500
To: <issues@omg.org>
Subject: Issue/Bug Report



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Name: Adolfo Sánchez-Barbudo Herrera
Company: Open Canarias S.L.
mailFrom: adolfosbh@opencanarias.com
Notification: Yes
Specification: : MOF. Query / Views / Transformations
Section: 8.4.7
FormalNumber: qvt-rtf
Version: QVT 1.1 RTF
RevisionDate: 07/07/07
Page: 125
Nature: Revision
Severity: Minor
HTTP User Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; es-ES; rv:1.8.1.13) Gecko/20080325 Ubuntu/7.10 (gutsy) Firefox/2.0.0.13
Description
The grammar rule used to produce a forExp doesn't coincide with the notation specified in the abstract syntax section for it (Pag 89, Section 8.2.2.6). The rule production in the grammar is wrong. Suggestion: Change the production rule: <for_exp> ::= ('forEach' | 'forOne') '(' <iter_declarator_list> ('|' <expression> )? ')' <expression_block>