Re: Motion P1788.1/M004.01
On 2016-05-13 10:36:33 -0400, Michel Hack wrote:
> On Fri, 13 May 2016 09:34:32 -0500, George Corliss wrote:
> > I submit that this entire thread of discussion, while interesting,
> > has no bearing on P1788.1, since our standard is based on 1788.
>
> I disagree -- it is definitely germane to 1788.1 because Ulrich raised
> the issue of 1788.1 (unlike 1788) being "based on 754-2008", and Lee
> Winter raised the issue of the existence of unbounded intervals. The
> kinds of unbounded intervals that must exist in 1788.1 are only a subset
> of those that must exist in the full standard. I think it is possible
> to have a 1788.1 where Entire is the only unbounded interval, for example.
> But that one is definitely required, as the proposal stands right now.
I don't think it is possible to have Entire as the only unbounded
interval: if I understand correctly, the intent of 1788.1 is to be
based on an inf-sup type. Thus intervals of the form [-inf,x] and
[x,+inf] are members of the interval type, in particular for x = 0.
--
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)