Thread Links			Date Links
Thread Prev	Thread Next	Thread Index	Date Prev	Date Next	Date Index

Motion P1788/M0009.01_ExactDotProduct: NO

To: "stds-1788@xxxxxxxx" <stds-1788@xxxxxxxx>
Subject: Motion P1788/M0009.01_ExactDotProduct: NO
From: Jean-Michel Muller <Jean-Michel.Muller@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2009 13:17:13 +0100
Cc: Jean-Michel Muller <Jean-Michel.Muller@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Delivered-to: mhonarc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
List-help: <http://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?LIST=STDS-1788>, <mailto:LISTSERV@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG?body=INFO%20STDS-1788>
List-owner: <mailto:STDS-1788-request@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG>
List-subscribe: <mailto:STDS-1788-subscribe-request@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG>
List-unsubscribe: <mailto:STDS-1788-unsubscribe-request@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG>
Sender: stds-1788@xxxxxxxx

Dear all,

My vote is NO:

I would vote YES if we mandated a dot product correctly rounded to the working precision. I am willing to consider exact dot product being *highly recommended*, yet not *mandatory*. My primary concern is that interval arithmetic should be both:
- implementable on very simple platforms 
- able to perform computations at very high speed on sophisticated ones

Regards


Jean-Michel
--
Jean-Michel Muller, directeur de recherches CNRS
Lab. LIP, ENS Lyon, 46 allée d'Italie, 69364 Lyon Cedex 07, France
Phone (+33) 4 72728229 - Fax (+33) 4 72728806
Jean-Michel.Muller@xxxxxxxxxxx   http://perso.ens-lyon.fr/jean-michel.muller

Prev by Date: Motion P1788/M0009.01_ExactDotProduct NO
Next by Date: Motion P1788/M0009.01_ExactDotProduct: NO
Previous by thread: Re: A motion to revise the status of Exact Dot Product & Complete Arithmetic
Next by thread: Motion P1788/M0009.01_ExactDotProduct: NO
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread