Re: As simple as it is now, I am still against motion 24.03...
Dear Joel
On 10 Jun 2011, at 16:15, Joel C. Salomon wrote:
> Seems to me the list of functions provided in interval form needs to be
> either exhaustive or extendible.
>
> Consider any of the functions this group has rejected from being
> required for inclusion, or any we haven't thought of. If I need them,
> am I stuck implementing them with interval arithmetic on the
> sub-expressions, giving me a wider-than-necessary result, or does the
> platform provide a mechanism through which an analyst can extend it?
Does 4.8.4 "User-supplied functions", in my just-circulated draft 20110608DecorationSystem.pdf, address your concerns at all? Or are you asking a different question?
John Pryce