Subject: SC 22 N 3494 - Summary of Voting on SC 22 N 3408, Registration an d Approval Ballot for PDTR 19755

From: Matthew Deane <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2002 10:12:51 -0400

ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC22
Programming languages, their environments and system software interfaces
Secretariat:  U.S.A.  (ANSI)
 
ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC22 N3494
 
TITLE:
Summary of Voting on SC 22 N 3408, Registration and Approval Ballot for PDTR
19755, Object
finalization for programming language COBOL (Type 2 TR)

DATE ASSIGNED:
2002-09-16
 
SOURCE:
SC 22 Secretariat

BACKWARD POINTER:
N/A
 
DOCUMENT TYPE:
Summary of Voting

PROJECT NUMBER:
22.01.07.01
 
STATUS:
Per the results of this ballot, the registration and approval of the PDTR is
approved.  The NB ballot comments were sent to the WG 4 Convenor for review
at their recent meeting.  WG 4 is instructed to send the text for DTR ballot
and a disposition of comments report to the SC 22 Secretariat for further
processing.

ACTION IDENTIFIER:
ACT
 
DUE DATE:
  
DISTRIBUTION:
Text

CROSS REFERENCE:
SC 22 N3408
 
DISTRIBUTION FORM:
Def
 
Address reply to:
ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC22 Secretariat
Matt Deane
ANSI
25 West 43rd Street
New York, NY  10036
Telephone:  (212) 642-4992
Fax:             (212) 840-2298
Email:  [email-masked]

___end cover page, beginning of summary of voting________

SUMMARY OF VOTING ON

Letter Ballot Reference No:  SC22 N3408
Circulated by:               JTC 1/SC22
Circulation Date:            2002-06-06
Closing Date:                2002-09-07

SUBJECT:  Summary of Voting on SC 22 N 3408, Registration Ballot for PDTR
19755, Object
finalization for programming language COBOL (Type 2 TR)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

The following responses have been received on the subject of PDTR
registration:

"P" Members supporting registration without comment                   

8 (China, Denmark, Japan, Republic of Korea, Netherlands, Norway, UK, USA)

"P" Members supporting registration with comments              

1 (Germany)        

"P" Members not supporting registration      

-

"P" Members abstaining                    

3 (Austria, Canada, Switzerland)

"P" Members not voting                    

11 (Belgium, Brazil, Czech Republic, Egypt, Finland, Ireland, DPR of Korea,
Romania, Russian Federation, Slovenia, Ukraine)

SUMMARY OF VOTING ON

Letter Ballot Reference No:  SC22 N3408
Circulated by:               JTC 1/SC22
Circulation Date:            2002-06-06
Closing Date:                2002-09-07

SUBJECT:  Summary of Voting on SC 22 N 3408, Approval Ballot for PDTR 19755,
Object
finalization for programming language COBOL (Type 2 TR)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

The following responses have been received on the subject of PDTR
approval:

"P" Members supporting approval without comment                   

6 (China, Denmark, Republic of Korea, Netherlands, Norway, UK)

"P" Members supporting approval with comments              

3 (Germany, Japan, USA)        

"P" Members not supporting approval       

-

"P" Members abstaining                    

3 (Austria, Canada, Switzerland)

"P" Members not voting                    

11 (Belgium, Brazil, Czech Republic, Egypt, Finland, Ireland, DPR of Korea,
Romania, Russian Federation, Slovenia, Ukraine)

NB Comments

Germany
We have the following comments on this technical report that should be
solved:

Finalization of Factory objects is not yet allowed. This should not only be
mentioned in annex B3 as unresolved technical issue but should be a syntax
rule in 11.6a AUTO-METHOD Paragraph, saying that this paragraph is only
allowed within the OBJECT part of a Class.

On  page 11 B.4: We understand this issue but we do not understand what is
unresolved with it, and that gives us some irritation.

Japan
[Technical]
1. There should be a rule that says that the definition of the 
auto-method finalizer shall be specified only once in a class definition.

2. Page 8, 6.7, Changes to 16, Standard classes, [a].
Since INVOKEFINALIZERS method is intended to trigger resource r
eclamation, rules for this method should mention reclamation.  Making 
objects unreachable does not mean they will be reclaimed promptly.

3. Page 11, Annex B.3, Finalizers in factory object.
Although it says "This proposed draft Technical Report does not provide a 
facility to specify a finalizer in the factory definition of a class.", 
no rule prohibits specifying a finalizer in the factory definition.  A 
rule should be added for this prohibition.

USA
(1)	We would like to see the document address more fully the problems
associated with asynchronicity with regards to finalization ;
(2)	We would like to see further progress in the resolution of the
unresolved issues in Annex B.