[Cfp-interest] (SC22WG14.14292) TS 18661-3 and usual arithmetic conversions for long double, double

[Joseph Myers]

On Wed, 22 Jun 2016, Jim Thomas wrote:

> > Even if not, mentioning float here seems cleaner than just 
> > mentioning long double and double.)
> 
> It would be specifying a vacuous case. The types that might have the 
> same set of values as float (_Float32, double, long double) have already 
> been covered. If not mentioning float is confusing, would adding a 
> parenthetical remark or note help?

I think so.

-- 
Joseph S. Myers
joseph at codesourcery.com