From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID,
	REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,28396555259c7864
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: wheeler@aphrodite (David Wheeler)
Subject: Re: AQS95 floatin point relational tests
Date: 1997/03/13
Message-ID: <5g9bbm$p7h@news.ida.org>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 225226180
References: <33241A3A.191B@lmco.com> <dewar.858097577@merv>
 <552293175wnr@diphi.demon.co.uk>
Organization: IDA, Alexandria, Virginia
Reply-To: dwheeler@ida.org
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1997-03-13T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


JP Thornley (jpt@diphi.demon.co.uk) wrote:

: The results of delving into my own archive is given below. 
: Clearly, anyone using the AQS should look carefully at 5.5.6 and 7.2.7,
: as well as 7.2.2 to 7.2.4, and make the most sensible interpretation...

And said Tucker Taft's response was:

: 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.
: However, Norm (or at least NC1, as we used to call his non-alter-ego ;-)
: has since disavowed all connection with this statement.

I'd like to see the AQ&S corrected.
Any suggestions on how this might be accomplished?
One possibility: someone could try to develop a correction that the
original AQ&S reviewers agree to.


--- David A. Wheeler
    dwheeler@ida.org