Re: Motion P1788.1/M004.02: YES
Hi Michael,
Good observations. I have incorporated them. Not sure if I have to circulate the text again.
Regards,
Ned
> On Jun 19, 2016, at 09:35, Michel Hack <mhack@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> I vote YES on the text of "6. Level 2 description", but with two
> editorial comments:
>
> Page 21 Line 9 (in 6.6.2): Delete "These number literals must be of the same"
>
> (This was an incomplete sentence; the substantive statement is on
> the preceding line 8.)
>
> Page 22 Line 7 (in 6.7.6): add "as defined by 754-2008" after "closest to x".
>
> (Unqualified "closest to x" could me misleading when x is finite
> but out of b64 range, as the largest representable magnitude Max
> could be seen as closer than infinity for any finite x, yet 2008-754
> specifies that the rounding threshold for nearest(x)=Inf is Max+ulp/2.)
>
> Michel.
> ---Sent: 2016-06-19 13:48:25 UTC