[Cfp-interest 3173] Re: use of "can not" in N3301 5.2.2.4p13

[Jim Thomas]

Hmm. In N3220 the problematic “can not” had been changed to “is not permitted to”, which has the intended meaning. But subsequent drafts have reverted to “can not”.

- Jim Thomas

> On Aug 7, 2024, at 6:44 AM, Vincent Lefevre <vincent at vinc17.net> wrote:
> 
> In N3301 5.2.2.4p13 (Example 4):
> 
>  [...] Values are independent of whether they are represented in
>  a register or in memory. For example, an implicit spilling of a
>  register can not alter the value. [...]
> 
> This seems to come from [CFP 3038] (2024-03-13):
> 
> Comment 125: *5.1.2.4#13. Change to "of a register can not alter the value."
> 
> As I understand this, by using the non-contracted form "cannot",
> the "not" applies to "alter the value". Basically, this would be
> equivalent to
> 
>  For example, an implicit spilling of a register can preserve
>  the value.
> 
> which is not what is intended by the previous sentence "Values are
> independent of whether [...]". This should have meant: an implicit
> spilling of a register *must* preserve the value.
> 
> So "can not" should be replaced by the contracted form "cannot".
> That is, it is forbidden to alter the value.
> 
> BTW, I suppose that this example assumes that FLT_EVAL_METHOD is
> 1 or 2, and anything is possible if it is negative.
> 
> -- 
> Vincent Lefèvre <vincent at vinc17.net> - 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)
> _______________________________________________
> Cfp-interest mailing list
> Cfp-interest at oakapple.net
> http://mailman.oakapple.net/mailman/listinfo/cfp-interest