- From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 10 Feb 2010 00:50:05 +0000
- To: public-qt-comments@w3.org
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=7921
John Snelson <john.snelson@oracle.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|REOPENED |RESOLVED
Resolution| |FIXED
--- Comment #4 from John Snelson <john.snelson@oracle.com> 2010-02-10 00:50:05 ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> I suspect that the errata6-004.xq should omit the "import schema" declaration
> if XQST0036 is the expected result.
Fixed.
(In reply to comment #3)
> Could you please explain why test errata8-002 does not exhibit a circularity?
>
> [Definition: A module M1 directly depends on another module M2 (different from
> M1) if a variable or function declared in M1 depends on a variable or function
> declared in M2.] It is a static error [err:XQST0093] to import a module M1 if
> there exists a sequence of modules M1 ... Mi ... M1 such that each module
> directly depends on the next module in the sequence (informally, if M1 depends
> on itself through some chain of module dependencies.)
>
>
> Module errata8_2a declares function errata8_2a:fun() which depends on
> $errata8_2b:var. Therefore errata8_2a depends on errata8_2b
>
> Module errata8_2b declared variable errata8_2b:var which depends on
> errata8_2a:fun2(). Therefore errata8_2b depends on errata8_2a.
>
> This gives us the sequence of modules:
>
> errata8_2a ... errata8_2b ... errata8_2a
>
> which exhibits the circularity.
>
> Or am I mistaken?
You're correct, although I thought the test should pass. I'm keeping that test
the way it is as it makes an interesting test case, and adding a new pass
scenario.
--
Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug.
Received on Wednesday, 10 February 2010 00:50:07 UTC