NICE Eiffel Standards Group -- Library Committee Mailing List To post to list: NICE-ESG-Libs@atlanta.twr.com To send mail to the Chairman of the committee: NICE-ESG-Libs-chair@atlanta.twr.com Administrative matters (sign up, unsubscribe, mail problems, etc): NICE-ESG-Libs-request@atlanta.twr.com
Date: Tue, 06 Jun 1995 10:24:22 +1000 (EST) From: cmingins@insect.sd.monash.edu.au (Christine Mingins) Subject: Comment from Jim McKim To: NICE-ESG-Libs@atlanta.twr.com (NICE-esg-libs ) The following comment has just been received from Jim McKim: ------------------------------------------------------------ Hi Christine, I notice that Steve Fisher just posted a note of concern about approving PELKS-8. He mentions my ARRAY proposal as one reason for deferring the vote. Would you please post the following either verbatim or in summary form? ------------------------------------------------------------------- Steve Fisher writes: [...] >It is important that a basic class library is established, but it is even >more important that the first vintage is of the highest quality. This, I >fear, is not the case at the moment - as implied by Jim McKim who pointed >out the poor quality of the pre and post conditions. While each committee member will have to come to his or her own decision as to whether they can vote for PELKS-8 as it stands, I just want to state that I am _not_ concerned about the fate of my proposal for better specifying ARRAY. I have complete confidence that the Committee can and will take up this issue after the immediate pressures subside. [...] >P.S. On a lighter note, Elk is a more appealing name than ELS - but as a >member of the Moose collaboration, I might be biased. Oh, it's definitely gotta be ELKS. How could there be any question? :-) Best, -- Jim *------------------------------------------------------------------------------* Jim McKim (203)-548-2458 Co-editor of Eiffel Outlook Internet: jcm@hgc.edu Subscribe early and often!
Date: Mon, 5 Jun 95 17:21:07 PDT From: bertrand@vienna.eiffel.com (Bertrand Meyer) Subject: Power again To: nice.lib@vienna.eiffel.com Copy to: From: Bertrand Meyer Mailer: BOOM It is to be expected that a class COMPLEX will have a power operator, such that e.g. (-1) ^ 0.5, i.e. square root of -1, has value i. Integer power is a special case. The properties of the general power operator are well known and accepted. I am also puzzled by Steve's assertion that he cannot implement the general power operator. Is this a logical impossibility (in which case ISE would be just as unable to provide this operator), or anything special to the Tower compiler? The latter seems unlikely but we may be missing something. This strikes me as an issue that should be vendor-neutral. The current PELKS version is mathematically well defined and corresponds to the basic notion of power operator. Why can't Tower (and others, probably including ISE) include another ``integer power'' operator (preferably with some coordination so that we don't use different operator names), and validate this idea so that it can be introduced in vintage 96? -- BM
