Document: N655 J11/97-018 Title: N504 and N643 (C9X Draft 8) The editorial review committee for N504 has agreed the following wording (given as diffs against draft 8). Can you please allocate this a formal number and put it into the process. While it seems silly that something this small can't be handled at Kona, I will understand if you tell me that the procedure won't let it be. ==== 1. In subclause 7.10, paragraph 3, change: va_list which is a type to: va_list which is an object type 2. In subclause 7.11.1, Introduction, paragraph 2, change: fpos_t which is an object type to: fpos_t which is an object type other than an array type The Rationale text is: In the case of va_list, there is no indication that the type must be an object type. In the case of fpos_t, there is no requirement for the type to be assignable (that is, not an array). If fpos_t were an array, then a function would not be able to handle fpos_t parameters in the same manner as other fpos_t variables. These are the only cases where a perverse implementation is possible. All other types defined by the Standard have sensible properties.