Re: P1788 Clauses 1 and 2
Vincent, Michel
On 4 Dec 2012, at 13:19, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> On 2012-12-03 09:04:54 +0000, John Pryce wrote:
>> On 1 Dec 2012, at 22:51, Michel Hack wrote:
>>> This standard specifies ... following ... at least one floating-point
>>> type defined by the IEEE-754/2008 standard.
>>>
>>> When did we decide this? We were going to have additional requirements
>>> for joint compliance with 1788 and 754 *if* a 754-type was supported,
>>> but I thought it was going to be possible to be 1788-compliant without
>>> using 754-types.
>>>
>>> I realise that the "Scope" is (I think) not really normative, but this
>>> should (if *unintended*) probably be rephrased, e.g.
>>>
>>> ...and at least one fully-specified numeric type
>>> such as an IEEE-754/2008 floating-point type.
>
> I have the same objection as Michel. Actually "specifies" used here
> is incorrect because the format is specified in IEEE 754, not in
> P1788. Now, a 754-format could only be optional (the point is that
> there is some specification in P1788 attached to it).
>
>> This made me search my files and I saw that what I included (with
>> changes of tense) is not exactly the text in the approved PAR, but a
>> slightly earlier draft. The piece of text under discussion has been
>> changed in the final PAR. See below. Michel, would that text,
>> delimited by **, remove your objection? (I wonder if you suggested
>> that change, back in 2008?)
>>
>> John Pryce
>>
>> "Scope" in actual PAR, approval date 12 Jun 2008:
>>> **This standard specifies basic interval arithmetic (IA) operations
>>> selecting and following one of the commonly used mathematical
>>> interval models. This standard supports the IEEE-754/2008 floating
>>> point types of practical use in interval computations.** [...]
>
> I think this is OK, except that I would replace "types" by "formats".
Done, I hope this is acceptable to all.
John