Motion 56 -- Level 2, Clauses 12.12.1-12.12.7
(Same comment as earlier on supposed discussion expiry of Nov 19 --
and I don't have any comments on Motion 55 for Clauses 12.10 and 12.13)
12.12 intro, bottom of page 54 (P1788/D8.1 of Nov 15): As I pointed out
for 12.6.2 already, we don't need explicit mixed-type operations for
inf-sup types -- and 754-conforming types *are* inf-sup types.
I'll have to think about mid-rad types based on 754 arithmetic. The
radius is ok (computed with outward rounding), but the midpoint may
be computed with round-to-nearest which *can be* affected by double
rounding. But (a) mid-rad types are not 754-conforming types, and
(b) accuracy of mid-rad computations might not be tightest, so it
probably does not matter for this either.
I conclude that we don't need this paragraph about mixed-type operations.
12.12.6, last paragraph (2nd bullet in Note, middl eof page 56):
"An implementation should not, and for an inf-sup type need not, ..."
Although "should not" is standard standard-speak, I don't get the
implication of "need not". I do understand the motivation.
Michel.
---Sent: 2013-11-25 05:13:47 UTC