Thread Links			Date Links
Thread Prev	Thread Next	Thread Index	Date Prev	Date Next	Date Index

NO on Motion P1788/0019.01

To: "Corliss, George" <george.corliss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: NO on Motion P1788/0019.01
From: Jean-Pierre Merlet <Jean-Pierre.Merlet@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 12 Sep 2010 18:23:56 +0200
Cc: stds-1788@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Delivered-to: mhonarc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <20100911191920.A6C65119D0BA@xxxxxxxxx>
List-help: <http://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?LIST=STDS-1788>, <mailto:LISTSERV@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG?body=INFO%20STDS-1788>
List-owner: <mailto:STDS-1788-request@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG>
List-subscribe: <mailto:STDS-1788-subscribe-request@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG>
List-unsubscribe: <mailto:STDS-1788-unsubscribe-request@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG>
Organization: INRIA
References: <F0A09527-C195-4B8D-B1A8-6A1F5694666E@xxxxxxxxxxxx> <4C8BCA67.1090802@xxxxxxxxxxxx> <20100911191920.A6C65119D0BA@xxxxxxxxx>
Reply-to: Jean-Pierre.Merlet@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sender: stds-1788@xxxxxxxx
User-agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.21 (X11/20090320)

I vote NO on this motion

In my opinion the motion is not clear enough about standard compliantimplementation of intervals. We may end up with implementation thatsatisfy the standard but have a much lower performance than inf-supexcept for a few cases.

JPM

References:
- Motion P1788/0019.01: Explicit/Implicit idatatypes
  - From: John Pryce
- Motion P1788/0019.01: Explicit/Implicit idatatypes -- voting period begins
  - From: Ralph Baker Kearfott
- YES on Motion P1788/0019.01
  - From: Dan Zuras Intervals

Prev by Date: Re: YES on Motion P1788/0019.01
Next by Date: Re: Do I have a second? Re: Motion on decoration bit to verify continuity
Previous by thread: Re: YES on Motion P1788/0019.01
Next by thread: Re: YES on Motion P1788/0019.01
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread