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

Re: Motion 58: Changes

John,

Thank you.  Please submit a complete revised motion, without the
items you wish to delete, prior to the beginning of voting.

Best regards,

Baker

On 11/20/2013 04:52 AM, John Pryce wrote:

P1788

I notify changes to my "consensus" Motion 58 (2013 Nov 8, at 13:10).


2. (Essential) Various changes to the start of Clause 7 "Flavors"...



This has become a more significant amendment to §7 to solve what I call the "Flavors Level 1 -> Level 2 problem". Therefore I will write at more length about it later today and submit it as a normal motion.


3. (Desirable) Several people like the idea that an implementation shall have a
  user-selectable mode of operation where as soon as one goes outside "common
  evaluations" an exception is signaled (possibly terminating execution but
  that is beyond the remit of the standard)...


The more I have discussed details, the more I think such a feature would not fit well with the structure of the standard and would frankly be a mess -- unless we spent time discussing it that we don't have.

Hence, I withdraw both items 2 and 3 of the motion. I leave item 1, to be treated as a consensus motion.

John Pryce




--

---------------------------------------------------------------
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
---------------------------------------------------------------