| Thread Links | Date Links | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thread Prev | Thread Next | Thread Index | Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index |
John Pryce wrote:
On 15 Aug 2011, at 14:35, Chenyi Hu wrote:I vote no on this motion. However, I would vote yes if the description of the motion assures that proposed decorations will assure reliability repeatedly (i.e. on the same and different machines the intervals contain the solution although the intervals may not be the same exactly.)It does assure that.
Assuming no intersection or union operations are present. Otherwise all bets are off.I'm not sure if this is what Chenyi was alluding to or not, but it is a valid concern.
Nate