Re: A proposal for the next motion
> Date: Thu, 21 May 2009 20:28:35 +0200
> From: =?ISO-8859-15?Q?J=FCrgen_Wolff_v_Gudenberg?=
> <wolff@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> To: Dan Zuras Intervals <intervals08@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> CC: Vincent Lefevre <vincent@xxxxxxxxxx>, stds-1788@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: A proposal for the next motion
>
> Dan
> I find these ideas quite intersting.
> in our (C++) software solution we played a little bit with 2 data
> types fo interval
> One : the normal type without tags for operands and storage
> Two: A specific type for a result of an expression with tags.That saves
> some flags and can be handled quite efficiently (in software
>
> Juergen
>
Well, don't keep us in suspense: What did you find?
What sort of things did you tag & what did you do with
the information? I have my own thoughts on the matter
but you are the first person who's mentioned doing the
experiment. Do you think its worth the effort or not? - Dan