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

I vote YES on Motion P1788/M0030.02:Level_1_constructors

I vote YES on Motion P1788/M0030.02:Level_1_constructors.

However it seems to be contradictory:

  The following Level 1 decorated interval constructors are defined,
  which shall have Level 2 versions as specified in <<suitable place
  in Clause 6>>.

and

  The decorated interval constructors are defined in terms of the
  following bare interval constructors, which are "virtual" since
  they have no Level 2 counterparts in the standard.

So, will there be Level 2 versions of the bare interval constructors?
Anyway, since this motion is about Level 1, this doesn't affect my
vote here.

-- 
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 / AriC project (LIP, ENS-Lyon)