Re: Why (IMO) you should vote Yes to Motion 14.02
> From: "Corliss, George" <george.corliss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> To: Dan Zuras Intervals <intervals08@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, P1788
> <stds-1788@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> CC: "Corliss, George" <george.corliss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Nate Hayes
> <nh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: Re: Why (IMO) you should vote Yes to Motion 14.02
> Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2010 16:20:12 +0000
>
> Dan,
>
> VERY interesting. What you outline certainly is closer to
> the standard I think I'd like to see, if we can develop such.
>
> On Jun 30, 2010, at 2:38 AM, Dan Zuras Intervals wrote:
>
> >> From: "Nate Hayes" <nh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >> To: "Dan Zuras Intervals" <intervals08@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
> >> "Christian Keil" <c.keil@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >> Cc: <stds-1788@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >> Subject: Re: Why (IMO) you should vote Yes to Motion 14.02
> >> Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2010 18:49:11 -0500
> >>
> >> Dan Zuras wrote:
> >>>
> >>> . . .
> >>>
> >
> > Let each interval datatype always be associated with a
> > floating-point datatype. Fixed precision, arbitrary
> > precision, binary, decimal, I don't care. Whatever you
> > have lying around in your language. So we will call one
> > interval datatype a Binary64 interval type because we can
> > exactly extract bounds to Binary64. We will call another
> > a Decimal3000 interval type because we can exactly extract
> > bounds to a 3000 digit decimal datatype. Whatever.
>
> Would we want to specify a few floating-point datatypes
> to promote reproducibility?
>
> >
> > . . .
> >
>
> Dr. George F. Corliss
We could.
And from a strictly pedantic standards point of view,
perhaps we should.
But as a practical matter, reproducibility will only
be possible among machines that support the same
floating-point type, whatever that is. Therefore,
we need not say anything about those types to get
reproducibility.
And, to be even more practical, pretty much any system
that sports a floating-point datatype that has a
representation of infinity within it is either a 754
system, Java, an MPFR system, or more than one of
those at the same time.
Reproducibility falls out from inbreeding. :-)
Dan