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

Re: Motion P1788.1/M003.01 - yes

To: STDS-1788@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: Motion P1788.1/M003.01 - yes
From: Rudnei Dias da Cunha <rudnei.cunha@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2016 12:01:29 +0000
Delivered-to: mhonarc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <1459320070.1810.1.camel@alumni.stanford.edu>
List-help: <https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?LIST=STDS-1788>, <mailto:LISTSERV@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG?body=INFO%20STDS-1788>
List-owner: <mailto:STDS-1788-request@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG>
List-subscribe: <mailto:STDS-1788-subscribe-request@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG>
List-unsubscribe: <mailto:STDS-1788-unsubscribe-request@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG>
References: <1459320070.1810.1.camel@alumni.stanford.edu>
Sender: stds-1788@xxxxxxxx

Dear fellow 1788 members,

I vote YES on P1788.1/M003.01.

Regards,

Rudnei

References:
- Re: Motion P1788.1/M003.01 - yes
  - From: Hossam A. H. Fahmy

Prev by Date: [stds-1788] New paper on correctness of compiler optimizations of floating-point arithmetic
Next by Date: Re: Motion P1788.1/M003.01 - YES
Previous by thread: Re: Motion P1788.1/M003.01 - YES
Next by thread: [stds-1788] New paper on correctness of compiler optimizations of floating-point arithmetic
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread