Re: ? Reasonable to propose stability policy on numeric type = decimal

From: Michael Everson (everson@evertype.com)
Date: Sat Jul 24 2010 - 19:39:43 CDT

Next message: Bill Poser: "Fwd: ? Reasonable to propose stability policy on numeric type = decimal"

Previous message: karl williamson: "Re: ? Reasonable to propose stability policy on numeric type = decimal"
In reply to: karl williamson: "Re: ? Reasonable to propose stability policy on numeric type = decimal"
Next in thread: Michael Everson: "Re: ? Reasonable to propose stability policy on numeric type = decimal"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Mail actions: [ respond to this message ] [ mail a new topic ]

On 25 Jul 2010, at 01:34, karl williamson wrote:

> the proposal did not ask for ones at one or eights at eight. It asked for contiguity. Why is this ad odds with common sense and practical code-position assignment?

It is unnecessary to make a rule about it.

Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com/

Next message: Bill Poser: "Fwd: ? Reasonable to propose stability policy on numeric type = decimal"
Previous message: karl williamson: "Re: ? Reasonable to propose stability policy on numeric type = decimal"
In reply to: karl williamson: "Re: ? Reasonable to propose stability policy on numeric type = decimal"
Next in thread: Michael Everson: "Re: ? Reasonable to propose stability policy on numeric type = decimal"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Mail actions: [ respond to this message ] [ mail a new topic ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Jul 24 2010 - 19:41:57 CDT