I don't think we ever defined "valid GENERIC" that way.
About a year ago, when we tried to define it, that's what we came up
with. If that isn't the definition, then what *is*? The problem is that
we have no document that says what is and is not valid GENERIC. At
least the proposed definition can answer the question of whether or not
something is valid.
If we had done that, the C and C++ front ends wouldn't have had to be
converted to make them produce valid GENERIC.
I'm talking about *expressions* and I think you're talking about statements.
