Re: Motion P1788/M0029.01: Level-3-interface-only --- Final version to vote on
Sorry, I'm quite late in the discussion...
On 2011-12-14 15:37:26 -0800, Dan Zuras Intervals wrote:
> If our compiler people do not object, I think this is an
> excellent idea. The use of "type" as an abstraction &
> "format" as the layout in memory is more in keeping with
> the colloquial use of these words. Therefore, more clear
> to our users.
Well, in languages, the "type" notion carries more than an abstraction
and even the layout in memory. For instance, in C, you have two
different types "int" and "long", and they are different even if
they have the same properties (same width and so on).
One needs to be very careful here. For instance, what if you have
an interval encoded by (inf,sup) and another one (-inf,sup), with
the same abstraction (Level 3 is also the same). Would you consider
that since the abstraction is the same, their type (in P1788) is
also the same? If yes, would you allow operations between them?
--
Vincent Lefèvre <vincent@xxxxxxxxxx> - Web: <http://www.vinc17.net/>
100% accessible validated (X)HTML - Blog: <http://www.vinc17.net/blog/>
Work: CR INRIA - computer arithmetic / Arénaire project (LIP, ENS-Lyon)