Re: Proposed disposition of comments
On 2015-04-15 07:52:21 +0000, John Pryce wrote:
> "An all-flavor decorated interval literal is a string comprising an
> all-flavor bare interval literal with value x, an underscore “_” and
> the decoration literal com. Its value is newDec(x)."
>
> The last sentence is as suggested by Vincent & Michel, instead of
> "... Its value is x_com."
> which would be more sensible.
It should be "Its value is x_com." otherwise this would change
the meaning for some hypothetical flavors, and this would be a
technical change. For instance, consider a flavor that has a
decoration "new" and which chooses:
newDec(x) = x_new
for all x (the standard doesn't seem to require that newDec(x) = x_com
for common intervals). With the Draft 9.6 text of 9.7.5, the
"[0,1]_com" literal has the value [0,1]_com. But if 9.7.5 is changed
to "... Its value is newDec(x).", then the "[0,1]_com" literal would
have the value [0,1]_new.
--
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)