Re: Motion to finalise interval literals
On 2013-06-07 20:02:05 +0200, Jürgen Wolff von Gudenberg wrote:
> P1788
> as already stated in one of my last emails, I think interval
> literals should not be required. They will involve languages and
> compilers, and ,hence, augment the workload in dissemination the of
> standard.
>
> so change the "shall" into a "should"
> Juergen
A "literal" is a concept from programming languages. If the term
"literal" is used in the standard, it should be synonymous to
a text2interval argument, possibly with some language-defined
transformations (e.g. a prefix and/or a suffix, character escape
mechanisms...), in particular to avoid clashes with other parts
of the language.
--
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)