From: "Norman H. Cohen" <ncohen@watson.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [Q] Portability of <= and >= with real operands
Date: 1996/12/02
Date: 1996-12-02T00:00:00+00:00 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <32A35972.6F41@watson.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: E1qwF3.z4.0.-s@inmet.camb.inmet.com
Tucker Taft wrote:
> This is a bug in AQ&S. Several of the reviewers of AQ&S pointed out
> this mistake, but alas, it somehow managed to slip through. One claim
> was that this statement was due to Norman Cohen, and hence indisputable.
Interesting argument, but I've rarely been able to use it successfully.
;-)
> However, Norm (or at least NC1, as we used to call his non-alter-ego ;-)
> has since disavowed all connection with this statement.
We *ALL* disavow any connection with this statement.
--
NC1, NC2, NC3, ...
(Norman H. Cohen)
mailto:ncohen@watson.ibm.com
http://www.research.ibm.com/people/n/ncohen
prev parent reply other threads:[~1996-12-02 0:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
1996-11-29 0:00 [Q] Portability of <= and >= with real operands JP Thornley
1996-11-29 0:00 ` Robert Dewar
1996-12-03 0:00 ` Keith Thompson
1996-12-03 0:00 ` Robert Dewar
1996-12-03 0:00 ` Tucker Taft
1996-12-03 0:00 ` Larry Kilgallen
1996-12-03 0:00 ` Robert Dewar
1996-12-04 0:00 ` Keith Thompson
1996-12-03 0:00 ` Thomas Koenig
1996-12-01 0:00 ` Tucker Taft
1996-12-02 0:00 ` Norman H. Cohen [this message]
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox