Re: Include language bindings? Re: Draft Standard Text, V02.1
Dear colleagues,
I would suggest we could provide a pseudo-language binding, in that we could define, for each operation/function, the input(s) and output(s), and how the operation/function should behave. That would be part of the standard and specific language bindings would be written on top of that, together with the language (Fortran, C, Ada, other) standards committee.
Regards,
Rudnei
2010/3/16 "Prof.Dr. Jürgen Wolff von Gudenberg"
<wolff@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
I completely agree with Dan's plea for languge bindings.
I think we can formulate rules not depending on a particular language.
"The basic operations are provide as functions or operators .."
"An _expression_ shall be executed as it is written..."
In my view P1788 is not a pure hardware standard, although I would like to have all functionality in hardware. In the mean time there will be software implementations conforming to the standards and disseminating the use of intervals.
Hopefully,
Juergen
John Pryce schrieb:
P1788, Dan
On 15 Mar 2010, at 16:34, Dan Zuras Intervals wrote:
That's a good question.
Looking at IEEE 754-1985, one sees that it was a decade or more
after the hardware standard was in use before there were language
bindings. Can including language bindings help the process?
Emphatically yes.
It was more than 2 decades that 754 lived without
standard language bindings & during that time a lot
of compilers found 'imaginative' ways to interpret
the meaning of the seemingly most obvious things,
like '+' & '*'.
Some of those interpretations were just 'different'.
Some were flat out wrong...
Dan has long argued this point, and I am persuaded by him. We need language bindings. This is what the P1788 Subgroup "_expression_ Rearrangement" is really about. Can it wake from sleep and address this please?
This is tricky, because by the nature of language bindings I think we, acting alone, can't create normative text on this. Or would be unwise to do so. That can only be done in collaboration with a relevant language standardization committee. If my health is spared to me I intend to join the Fortran committee when our work is near completion.
But if we produce a P1788 clause of _recommendations_ on this topic, they will carry a lot of weight. We should then be ready to revise it a year or two or three later in the light of experience in language committees.
Regards
John