Meaning of MISRA AC SLSF 045B (par. 3.6.11)

Forum for discussing and asking questions about the MISRA document MISRA AC SLSF "Modelling design and style guidelines for the application of Simulink and Stateflow"

Moderators: david ward, GeoffFrost

Posts: 1
Joined: Fri Aug 15, 2014 6:56 pm
Company: Jacobs Vehicle Systems

Meaning of MISRA AC SLSF 045B (par. 3.6.11)

Postby neffnan » Fri Aug 29, 2014 4:08 pm

I can't make sense of the wording of 045B. I think there may be a copy-&-paste problem--the English seems garbled--but I'm not sure enough of my understanding of Stateflow yet to figure out what the 'correct' and 'incorrect' examples are meant to convey, so I'm not comfortable assuming how the rule should read. Could someone perhaps explain this rule for me or tell me how the rule should read? Thanks.

Posts: 52
Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2004 12:24 pm

Re: Meaning of MISRA AC SLSF 045B (par. 3.6.11)

Postby MISRA Reply » Tue Sep 02, 2014 1:14 pm

You are correct that the text for this rule appears garbled in this version. The MISRA AC working group agrees that this should read "In all state-charts, any variable written on a state's exit actions must not be written on transitions..."

The MISRA AC SLSF guidelines are currently under review and the wording of this rule will be reworked for the next revision.

Return to “MISRA AC SLSF discussions”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests