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

Re: I vote NO on Motion P1788/M0024.02:RoundedOperations

> Date: Sun, 15 May 2011 18:10:45 -0500
> From: Ralph Baker Kearfott <rbk@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> To: Dan Zuras Intervals <intervals08@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> CC: Ulrich Kulisch <Ulrich.Kulisch@xxxxxxxxxxx>, 
>  stds-1788@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: I vote NO on Motion P1788/M0024.02:RoundedOperations
> 
> Dan, P-1788,
> 
> I'm a bit confused at this point.  I think the confusion
> comes from not knowing precisely what is meant by
> "processor."  Does "processor" include a software
> environment, or does it mean a  hardware processor, as in
> "8087 floating point processor?"
> 
> Baker
> 

	I mean it to mean the microprocessor or CPU.

	But you bring up a good point.  In the 1980s,
	the 8087 was an optional CO-processor.  And
	today we have graphics processors, parallel
	processors, vector processors, & any of a
	number of things that might come under the
	general concept of "done in hardware".  Not
	even counting things like nano-instructions
	or syllables that make up concepts in between
	hardware & more conventional notions of
	"instructions".

	All the more reason for us to stay out of
	this business.

	IMHO, of course,


			  Dan