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

Re: mid-rad, inf-sup, a caution...

I point out again that mid-rad is an important component
"under the hood" of INTLAB, which I perceive to be the
most widely-used interval package.  (Again, correct me
if this statement is inaccurate.)

Baker

On 5/10/2010 03:21, Dan Zuras Intervals wrote:

Date: Mon, 10 May 2010 09:52:27 +0200


.
.
.

P1788

in order to KISS to keep our standard simple, we
should not add mid-rad as a first-class format.

Juergen


.
.
.

	We could use KISS to: get in, get out, right a quick
	&  correct inf-sup only standard&  be home by Christmas.

	But if we do a disservice to the interval community by
	leaving half of them out of it, what have we really
	accomplished?


.
.
.

	I think it is better to standardize both rather than
	confuse the world with approved&  non-approved
	intervals.

	So since we cannot eliminate mid-rad as a concept,
	our question becomes: Do we admit it as an deprecated
	addition to an inf-sup standard or do we write a
	standard with both on equal footing?

	Before Hossam wrote his note I was in favor of the
	former.  Now I think the latter has merit.  Ultimately
	you all are more qualified to answer this question
	than I am.

	But I think it deserves your serious thought.

	End of soapbox. :-)

				Dan




--

---------------------------------------------------------------
R. Baker Kearfott,    rbk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx   (337) 482-5346 (fax)
(337) 482-5270 (work)                     (337) 993-1827 (home)
URL: http://interval.louisiana.edu/kearfott.html
Department of Mathematics, University of Louisiana at Lafayette
(Room 217 Maxim D. Doucet Hall, 1403 Johnston Street)
Box 4-1010, Lafayette, LA 70504-1010, USA
---------------------------------------------------------------