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

Do I have a second Re: Motion on Clause 6 of standard

P-1788:

Do I have a second to the appended motion?
(I have attached John's current version of the
P-1788 document, containing clause 6.)

Baker

On 10/03/2013 07:11 PM, John Pryce wrote:
.
.
.

To set the ball rolling I submit
Motion==============================================
Clause 6 "Expressions and the functions they define"
be accepted as standard text.
====================================================



I apologise that this means rejecting text that was accepted before
(motions 40, 41 I think) but there is good reason IMO.
See explanation below, which forms a mini-rationale.
.
.
.

- §6 Expressions. I had previously (re)written this with an informal
   definition of what an expression is, on the grounds that a formal
   defn would constrain a language, which is not 1788's job.
   Wolfram Kahl (McMaster) pointed out that "expression" as used in
   FTIA is nothing to do with a language - one could apply the FTIA to
   results of an interval program written in machine code, say.
   So rewritten again and with more precise definitions.

   Big change, so I think this needs a separate motion.


.
.
.

--

---------------------------------------------------------------
Ralph Baker Kearfott,   rbk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx   (337) 482-5346 (fax)
(337) 482-5270 (work)                     (337) 993-1827 (home)
URL: http://interval.louisiana.edu/kearfott.html
Department of Mathematics, University of Louisiana at Lafayette
(Room 217 Maxim D. Doucet Hall, 1403 Johnston Street)
Box 4-1010, Lafayette, LA 70504-1010, USA
---------------------------------------------------------------

Attachment: P1788_MAIN.pdf
Description: Adobe PDF document