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: Mon, 27 Mar 1995 12:22:25 +1000 (EST) From: cmingins@insect.sd.monash.edu.au (Christine Mingins) Subject: A Bug in PELKS To: NICE-ESG-Libs@atlanta.twr.com Dear Committee Members, Bertrand recently posted a note about a bug in PELKS assertions for 'deep_equal' Does anyone object to incorporating the proposed bug fix into PELKS? The alternative is to call for formal discussions and a vote. Please air your views on this in the next week or so. Regards, Christine > > One of our users has found a bug in the PELKS assertions for > `deep_equal'. > > The problem is the postcondition clause labeled `same_type' which > has been introduced in version 6. (It's nice to have a copy > with change bars, by the way.) The postcondition reads > > same_type: Result implies some.same_type (other) > > This is only correct if `some' is not void. > > We propose correcting this bug as follows: > > (1) Adding a new clause > > both_or_none_void: (some = Void) implies (Result = (other = Void)) > > (2) Rewriting the offending clause `same_type' as > > same_type: (Result and (some /= Void)) implies some.same_type > (other) > > > We have applied these corrections to the ISE implementation of the > library, (since we feel it is better to be correct than standard!). > > We think these corrections should also be applied to the PELKS. > Christine, would you please look at the issue and decide what to > do (start a discussion, start a vote on the above correction, > accept it as a bug fix without a vote)? > >
Date: Mon, 27 Mar 1995 12:12:24 +1000 (EST) From: cmingins@insect.sd.monash.edu.au (Christine Mingins) Subject: Voting Results, PART_COMPARABLE, COMPARABLE, HASHABLE To: NICE-ESG-Libs@atlanta.twr.com Voting Results, PART_COMPARABLE, COMPARABLE, HASHABLE ------------------------------------------------------ FH PJ BM DV CM ---------------------------| LIB95-PAJ-PART_COMPARABLE |YES YES NO NO NO ---------------------------| LIB95-PAJ-COMPARABLE |YES YES NO NO NO ---------------------------| LIB95-TWR-HASHABLE |YES YES NO NO NO ---------------------------| LIB95-TWR-HASHABLE2 |YES YES NO NO NO ---------------------------| No motion was passed. The following members did not vote, and will be aware from previous discussions that this amounts to an effective NO vote: Per Grape Andrew MacGaffey Greg Moberg Regards, Christine
