NICE-ESG-Libs Digest V1 #256

NICE-ESG-Libs Digest Mon, 12 Jun 95 Volume 1 : Issue 256 Today's Topics: Michael Schweitzer's comments Vote and Procedures

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, 12 Jun 95 18:35:14 PDT From: bertrand@vienna.eiffel.com (Bertrand Meyer) Subject: Michael Schweitzer's comments To: nice.lib@vienna.eiffel.com Copy to: From: Bertrand Meyer Mailer: BOOM Dear Colleagues: I was disappointed by Michael Schweitzer's notes about the power operator. It is hard to see what use we can make of them. The contemptuous tone (``it is sad that so many people confuse...'', ``ISE's definition has nothing to do with mathematics'', ``it's a shame that such scientific [sic] unsound proposals need to be discussed at all'') does not help; neither Michael nor anyone else has a monopoly on mathematical soundness. Declaring your adversaries K.O. for reason of incompetence is not a very constructive way to debate, especially when your own views are rather subjective. I must say in particular that I don't understand the relevance of Michael's distinction between algebraic and analytic properties. Applying his reasoning to multiplication rather than exponentiation, we could write, paraphrasing him: --- BEGIN SATIRE --- It is sad that so many people confuse multiplication (i.e. a * b) with multiplicative functions and division. Multiplication is an algebraic concept, multiplicative functions and division are analytic concepts. Mul- tiplication with non-negative integers is possible whenever you have a notion of addition: a * b is simply an abbreviation for a + a + ... + a (b times). For example, in every group (written additively) you have multiplication. You can multiply a square matrix by 100, say. You can multiply a polynomial by 2, say - etc. Multiplicative functions and division are something com- pletely different. It would take too much space to explain this (and for non-mathematicians it would be of little use anyway). Suffice it to say that multiplication (with integer multiplicands) is mathematically the more general concept. --- END SATIRE --- If we believe that, then infix "*" in class REAL should only take integer arguments. Michael's posting confirmed by reductio ad absurdum that the issue belongs not to mathematics but to computing. Steve's note about reference-expanded conversions made more sense and deserves careful examination. Also, please read carefully Paul Dubois' note, which seems pretty typical of what numerical software programmers, ``in the trenches'', expect. Best regards, -- BM

Date: Mon, 12 Jun 95 21:32:30 -0400 From: Jason Schroeder <shrode@wsc.com> Subject: Vote and Procedures To: NICE ESG Library Committee I vote for Paul Johnson. M. Meyer states he likes the current voting scheme because it limits the possibility "to force various change proposals ... down ISE's throat". Although a new member, I find the underlying assumption that an implementor's views on library matters are superior to practitioners lacks fairness. Alternatively, as a practitioner, I do not like having lethargic design processes stuffed down my throat either. ;-) The implication that the committee members are incapable of making measured decisions for the proper reasons endear me less to M. Meyer's positions on this matter. I am not M. Meyer but our votes on this committee both count for one vote. Arguing that either of us should find benefit with votes no one casts suddenly removes all fairness from the proceedings. The committee is incapable of measuring a member's involvement or competency when an abstention is counted as "No". The process illustrated by the events of the past few weeks demonstrates that committee is better run by not being involved until two days before a vote. Regardless of the positive outcome this time, this is the greater danger to the vitality of any committee. I hope this is to be a rare occurrence. Jason Schroeder P.S. Purely an observation: might I also point out, that many committee bodies have guidelines that determine if 1/3 (for example) of a committee's members are meeting not in the committee but talking about committee related business anyways that they are doing something improper. (I have forgotten the technical term for this.) They have this rule for more than just esoteric reasons. Something to consider.