Re: Motion P1788/M0036.03:Flavors Vote NO
On 22 Aug 2012, at 18:04, Kreinovich, Vladik wrote:
> It may be a good idea to add a similar explanatory wording to our standard as well
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ferguson, Warren E [mailto:warren.e.ferguson@xxxxxxxxx]
> This is probably carry-over form IEEE FP Std 754-1985, and I copied this from that standard:
>
> shall: The use of the word shall signifies that which is obligatory in any conforming implementation.
>
> should: The use of the word should signifies that which is strongly recommended ...
It is in the draft text §1.5 and has been for a long time. This includes:
> – “shall” indicates mandatory requirements strictly to be followed in order to conform to the standard and from which no deviation is permitted (“shall” means “is required to”);
> –“should” indicates that among several possibilities, one is recommended as particularly suitable, without mentioning or excluding others; or that a certain course of action is preferred but not necessarily required; or that (in the negative form) a certain course of action is deprecated but not prohibited (“should” means “is recommended to”).
as well as definitions for "may" and "might". All are copied from official IEEE verbiage, as I recall.
John P