Re: P1788: PLEASE VOTE on Motions 30.02, 31.01, and 32.01
On Thu, Apr 12, 2012 at 8:30 AM, Corliss, George
<george.corliss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> P1788,
>
> Voting is underway on three motions. Baker's calls for each are appended below.
>
> Motion M0030.02 Constructors
> Current tally: Yes: 21; No: 1; Required for quorum: 31
> Voting by rules for position papers
> Voting closes Tuesday, April 17
My vote is NO.
> Motion M0031.01 Level 1 text
> Current tally: Yes: 19; No: 3; Required for quorum: 31; 2/3 majority required to pass
> Voting by rules for STANDARD WORDING
> Voting closes Tuesday, April 17
My vote is NO. My rationale is that the standard must provide an
efficient mechanism for a user of an 1788-compliant implementation to
distinguish underflow from zero and a mechanism for distinguishing
overflow from infinity. If such mechanisms were incorporated into the
proposed standard text my vote would be YES.
> Motion M0032.02 Midpoint
> Current tally: Yes: 9; No: 11; Required for quorum: 31
> Voting by rules for position papers
> Voting closes Tuesday, April 22
My vote is NO. My rationale is that I do not believe in use cases
wherein a user confronted with a simple mean of a bounded
representation will be confused by a result of overflow.
Lee Winter
Nashua, New Hampshire
United States of America