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=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,338371dbbe7075d X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: stt@houdini.camb.inmet.com (Tucker Taft) Subject: Re: [Q] Portability of <= and >= with real operands Date: 1996/12/01 Message-ID: #1/1 X-Deja-AN: 201730990 sender: news@inmet.camb.inmet.com (USENET news) x-nntp-posting-host: houdini.camb.inmet.com references: <252531213wnr@diphi.demon.co.uk> organization: Intermetrics, Inc. newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 1996-12-01T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: JP Thornley (jpt@diphi.demon.co.uk) wrote: : I'm having difficulty understanding the statements in the Ada : Quality and Style Guide on the portability of relational expressions : with real operands:- : Section 5.5.6 - "... the use of <= is more portable than either < or =" 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. : Phil Thornley : | JP Thornley EMail jpt@diphi.demon.co.uk | -Tucker Taft stt@inmet.com http://www.inmet.com/~stt/ Intermetrics, Inc. Cambridge, MA USA