<HTML>
<HEAD>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
<TITLE>
    CWG Issue 394</TITLE>
<meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0">
<STYLE TYPE="text/css">
  INS { text-decoration:none; font-weight:bold; background-color:#A0FFA0 }
  .INS { text-decoration:none; background-color:#D0FFD0 }
  DEL { text-decoration:line-through; background-color:#FFA0A0 }
  .DEL { text-decoration:line-through; background-color: #FFD0D0 }
  @media (prefers-color-scheme: dark) {
    HTML { background-color:#202020; color:#f0f0f0; }
    A { color:#5bc0ff; }
    A:visited { color:#c6a8ff; }
    A:hover, a:focus { color:#afd7ff; }
    INS { background-color:#033a16; color:#aff5b4; }
    .INS { background-color: #033a16; }
    DEL { background-color:#67060c; color:#ffdcd7; }
    .DEL { background-color:#67060c; }
  }
  SPAN.cmnt { font-family:Times; font-style:italic }
</STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<P><EM>This is an unofficial snapshot of the ISO/IEC JTC1 SC22 WG21
  Core Issues List revision 118b.
  See http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/ for the official
  list.</EM></P>
<P>2025-09-28</P>
<HR>
<A NAME="394"></A><H4>394.
  
<I>identifier-list</I> is never defined
</H4>
<B>Section: </B>15.1&#160; [<A href="https://wg21.link/cpp.pre">cpp.pre</A>]
 &#160;&#160;&#160;

 <B>Status: </B>CD1
 &#160;&#160;&#160;

 <B>Submitter: </B>Nicola Musatti
 &#160;&#160;&#160;

 <B>Date: </B>16 Dec 2002<BR>


<P>[Voted into WP at October 2004 meeting.]</P>

<P>In Clause 15 [<A href="https://wg21.link/cpp">cpp</A>], paragraph 1, the
<I>control-line</I> non-terminal symbol
is defined in terms of the <I>identifier-list</I> non-terminal, which is
never defined within the standard document.</P>

<P>The same definition is repeated in A.13 [<A href="https://wg21.link/gram.cpp">gram.cpp</A>].</P>

<P>I suggest that the following definition is added to
Clause 15 [<A href="https://wg21.link/cpp">cpp</A>], paragraph 1, after the one for
<I>replacement-list</I>:</P>
<UL>
<I>identifier-list</I>:
<UL>
<I>identifier</I>
<BR><I>identifier-list</I> , <I>identifier</I>
</UL>
</UL>

<P>This should be repeated again in A.13 [<A href="https://wg21.link/gram.cpp">gram.cpp</A>],
again after the one for <I>replacement-list</I>. It might also be
desirable to include a third repetition in 15.7 [<A href="https://wg21.link/cpp.replace">cpp.replace</A>],
paragraph 9.</P>

<P><B>Proposed Resolution (Clark Nelson, Dec 2003):</B></P>

<P>In Clause 15 [<A href="https://wg21.link/cpp">cpp</A>], paragraph 1, immediately
before the definition of <I>replacement-list</I>, add:</P>
<UL>
<I>identifier-list</I>:
<UL>
<I>identifier</I>
<BR><I>identifier-list</I> , <I>identifier</I>
</UL>
</UL>

<P>If the correct TROFF macros are used, the definition will appear
automatically in appendix A. It doesn't need to be repeated in 16.3p9.</P>

<P>With respect to the question of having the preprocessor description be
synchronized with C99, this would fall into the category of a justified
difference. (Other justified differences include those for Boolean
expressions, alternative tokens, and terminology differences.)</P>

<BR><BR>
</BODY>
</HTML>
