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

Re: Reasons (not) to vote Motion 27: NO

On 08/05/2011 05:38 PM, J. Wolff von Gudenberg wrote:



With Motion 27, no such error occurs, and the result is whitewashed to
safe, no matter what was going on.

You have not given any of the examples I requested.


I gave the example y=1/(x intersect (x+1)), which is nonsense but
passes a Motion 27 conforming compiler necessarily with a safe result.


That function is not an extension of a real function .But as a function
IR -> IR it can be evaluated with decorated intervals
giving the expected result.
Just that is the trouble. With Motion 26, such nonsense is recognized as nonsense, while with Motion 27, this is perfectly legitinmate and yields a safe result.