[Cfp-interest] C binding for IEEE 754-2008

Dan Zuras IEEE forieee at nonabelian.com
Wed Jul 18 03:49:21 PDT 2012


> From: Jim Thomas <jaswthomas at sbcglobal.net>
> Subject: C binding for IEEE 754-2008
> Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2012 16:56:04 -0700
> Cc: CFP <cfp-interest at ucbtest.org>, John Benito <benito at bluepilot.com>
> To: stds-754 at IEEE.ORG
> 
> 
> A C floating point study group, under ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG14, the =
> international standardization working group for the programming language =
> C, has been working on a C language binding for IEEE Std 754-2008. WG14 =
> is currently seeking approval to adopt this specification as a work =
> item. A draft of Part 1 of the specification is posted at =
> http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n1615.pdf for early =
> informal review. Your review and input would be much appreciated. Please =
> send comments to the study group reflector at cfp-interest at ucbtest.org.
> 
> -Jim Thomas=

	Jim,

	(From just a few cursory readings.)

	I see almost no mention of either the newly defined
	tower of precisions or the elements of Clause 9 other
	than their mention WRT rounding modes.  Although it
	mentions that these will appear in parts 3 through 5.

	While I recognise that both the tower & transcendental
	functions are optional, not specifying them for C means
	that C (likely) never intendeds to support them.

	If this is so it should be stated up front.  Or, if it
	is intended that they be supported in some later
	revision of C, that should be stated.

	While it is mentioned (up front) that 754 went to a
	lot of trouble to support intelligent reproducibility,
	there seems to be less support of it within C.  Same
	comments as above.  (Or are these in part 5?)

	I notice that support of those things that will lead
	to the support of intervals is also not mentioned
	even though we went to some trouble to put them in
	754.  As there is a committee currently working on
	the interval standard (1788), I consider this as
	largely justified on that basis alone.

	The rest seems just fine to me on a cursory look.

	Enjoy,

				Dan


More information about the Cfp-interest mailing list