Fwd: Motion 44.01 PLEASE VOTE - I vote No

["Corliss, George" <george.corliss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Begin forwarded message:

From: "G. William (Bill) Walster" <bill@xxxxxxxxxxx>

Subject: Re: Motion 44.01 PLEASE VOTE - I vote No

Date: May 30, 2013 6:29:08 PM CDT

Cc: "Corliss, George" <george.corliss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>

George,

I am unable to send the following to the P1788 email address <stds-1788@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> that I have.  So, will you please forward it to the alias for me?

Thanks in advance,

Bill

=====email to P1788=========

I am unable (perhaps it is me) to determine if the scheme implemented in Sun's implementation of string to interval and interval to string conversion will be standard conforming or not.  The Sun Fortran 95 implementation explicitly deals with strings as infinitely precise decimal numbers versus strings in which interval width is determined by the last decimal digit in a string.

If the Sun Fortran implementation is standard conforming, or if the draft can be updated to allow the sun string conversion implementation to be standard conforming, I will change my vote to Yes.

See Section 2.9.2 starting on page 98 of Sun's Interval Arithmetic Programming Reference.

Cheers,

Bill


On 5/30/13 8:48 AM, Ian McIntosh wrote:

I vote YES on Motion 44 Constructors.

- Ian McIntosh          IBM Canada Lab         Compiler Back End Support and Development