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: 103376,28396555259c7864
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: dewar@merv.cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar)
Subject: Re: AQS95 floatin point relational tests
Date: 1997/03/11
Message-ID: <dewar.858097577@merv>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 224746013
References: <33241A3A.191B@lmco.com>
Organization: New York University
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1997-03-11T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


William asks

<<> Phil Thornely quite reasonably questions the recommendations in AQ&S with
> respect to floating-point comparisons. We have already had an extended
> CLA thread on this topic, and the conclusion was that the AQ&S recommendations
> here are badly flawed and should be ignored.

Do you mean that the guidline is flawed or that the language is flawed?
Is there a FAQ on this issue I can read offline?
>>

The guidelines are plain wrong, the language is fine.

No, there is no FAQ on this issue, it is not an FAQ (it has come up
twice in the history of CLA). If you have an old archive of CLA, you
may be able to find the old thread.