(j3.2006) (SC22WG5.5753) Units of measure

Van Snyder Van.Snyder
Tue Jul 5 14:53:31 EDT 2016

On Tue, 2016-07-05 at 16:31 +0100, David Muxworthy wrote:
> On 3 Jul 2016, John Reid wrote:
> > Yes, we could have written it this way, but when proposing it as
> > a TS work item, we would have had to say that we intended to
> > include it in a future standard.
> This is not how the C++ people are working.  They have published six
> TSs in the last 12 months (18822, 19217, 19568, 19570, 19571 and
> 19841), most of which have words similar to:
> "This Technical Specification is non-normative. Some of the
> functionality described by this Technical Specification may be
> considered for standardization in a future version of C++, but it is
> not currently part of any C++ standard. Some of the functionality in
> this Technical Specification may never be standardized, and other
> functionality may be standardized in a substantially changed form.

I shall propose the units TS again with this wording.  I believe it is
valuable to preserve this work, in case anybody else ever realizes that
reliability is actually important.

> The goal of this Technical Specification is to build widespread
> existing practice for Transactional Memory. It gives advice on
> extensions to those vendors who wish to provide them."
> Despite what has been said in this thread, one way ahead for WG5
> would be to add similar weasel words to N1969, push it forward as a
> TS and see how much interest it attracts.  
> David
> _______________________________________________
> J3 mailing list
> J3 at mailman.j3-fortran.org
> http://mailman.j3-fortran.org/mailman/listinfo/j3

More information about the J3 mailing list