Re: P1788 input/output
On 2013-07-19 20:57:20 +0100, John Pryce wrote:
> On 2013 Jun 28, at 13:18, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> > ...If we don't plan to specify free-form output (I don't think we should,
> > as this must remain language-defined or implementation-defined, IMHO),
> > then we don't need it: this is just a language matter. You can mention
> > that in a footnote.
> Why shouldn't we? Maybe there's a misunderstanding, "free-form"
> isn't the correct word? But IMO we need a "vanilla" way to turn an
> interval to an interval literal.
Well, it depends on what you propose...
I have a few comments on the latest version (2013-07-16):
In the last paragraph of §12.1: "exact representation" is vague.
Is this "exact character-string representation"? To avoid any
ambiguity, it should give a reference to §12.4.
In §12.4: I don't understand the paragraph after the note. Don't
you mean interval2exact and interval2text? I think 0 should also
be represented as "0". And couldn't interval literals "[x]" be
allowed for point intervals?
--
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)