Re: Motion P1788/M0051:IntervalLiteralsText -- discussion period begins
Vincent,
I'm not sure the syntax in the common part of the standard
can be exactly the same as it is now.
Decoration systems are flavor-specifix.
Set-based flavour has "[NaI]" form and "_trv", "_def", "_dac", "_com" decoration suffixes.
Modal flavor has decorations "_ein", "_dac", "_def", "_gap", "_ndf".
Probably, modal flavor doesn't need the "[NaI]" form.
The "-inf" and "+inf" number literals and unbounded uncertain forms "1??u"
are not necessary for common intervals.
Kaucher/modal flavours need to extend flavor indepent syntax
with negative radius and with "l > u" permission:
"[11,7]"
"9?-2".
Hence it is not so simple to move subsection section 12.11 into Chapter 1.
It will be necessary to split it into flavor-independed and set-based specific parts
whith links from set-based to flavor-independent. I'm still in doubts.
-Dima
----- Исходное сообщение -----
От: j.d.pryce@xxxxxxxxxx
Кому: vincent@xxxxxxxxxx, dmitry.nadezhin@xxxxxxxxxx
Копия: STDS-1788@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Отправленные: Среда, 2 Октябрь 2013 г 16:35:17 GMT +04:00 Абу-Даби, Маскат
Тема: Re: Motion P1788/M0051:IntervalLiteralsText -- discussion period begins
On 2013 Oct 2, at 09:03, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
On 2013-10-01 22:19:17 -0700, Dmitry Nadezhin wrote:
>> The portable interval literal syntax is defined for the Set-Based flavour.
>> What do proponents of other flavours think about interval literals ?
>> Interval literals in different flavours are not obliged to have the
>> same syntax, but we can afford a small effort to make their styles
>> similar (if this doesn't delay discussion).
>
> I think that the same syntax should be accepted for common intervals
> (same behavior on common intervals in all flavors). This is what
> I proposed to John for the new clause (§9) he added at the end of
> Chapter 1, on the functions required/recommended in all flavors.
At first sight this is a good idea. Dmitry, can I leave it to you to follow this up? Find out from other-flavor proponents if there are any valid reasons NOT to do so. If there are none, please prepare the relevant revisions to Chapter 1 text.
John Pryce