Re: Common interval literals
On 2015-03-10 07:04:18 -0700, Dmitry Nadezhin wrote:
> > Page 31 lines 25-26, I don't understand "except for the decorated
> > textToInterval(s) constructor."
>
> This means that the textToInterval(s) constructor is an exemption of
> the above rule.
>
> Bare constructor textToInterval("[1,2]_com") has no value, but the
> decorated constructor textToInterval("[1,2]_com") has the common
> decorated value "[1,2]_com".
>
> Have you a suggestion how to say it clearer ?
So, the whole requirement seems wrong. IMHO, one should allow other
exceptions. For instance, a flavor may define a constructor very
similar to textToInterval(s), thus with the same exception for the
decorated constructor.
I would remove the whole sentence "Otherwise, it has no common value,
except for the decorated textToInterval(s) constructor." Or do you see
a good reason to require such a restriction for most constructors here
in the general requirements of the main standard?
--
Vincent Lefèvre <vincent@xxxxxxxxxx> - Web: <https://www.vinc17.net/>
100% accessible validated (X)HTML - Blog: <https://www.vinc17.net/blog/>
Work: CR INRIA - computer arithmetic / AriC project (LIP, ENS-Lyon)