Re: Motion P1788/M007.01_NaI: Discussion period begins
John Pryce schrieb:
We should indeed consider different possible representations to see
which works most efficiently for whatever NaI definition(s) we decide,
but isn't it a bit early to make a decision on that?
when we try to implement 1788 in software we need some information about
representation. Following an idea from David Hough I changed rep to NaI
= [sNaN,sNaN]. This matches my view of NaI best. Nai is an exceptionally
constructed emptyset.
Juergen, are you totally opposed to NaI with payload? Or would you be
amenable to a "friendly amendment" to your motion?
I amended my motion already by recommending a three way decision.
so supporters of NaI with payload can vote
so can those people who are against NaI at all
I hope to get a clear majority for my case which is a kind of compromise
ONE unique NaI
Juergen
P.S. following this discussion [oo,oo] does not exist
--
=======
o Prof. Dr. J. Wolff v. Gudenberg, Informatik 2
/ \ Univ. Wuerzburg, Am Hubland, D-97074 Wuerzburg
info2 o Tel.: +49 931 / 31-86602 Fax: +49 931 / 888-6603
/ \ Uni e-mail: wolff@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
o o Wuerzburg http://www2.informatik.uni-wuerzburg.de/