<html>
<body>
<font size=3>If you wanted to implement augmented operations in software,
would you want access to the roundTiesToZero rounding mode?<br><br>
- Ian<br><br>
At 23/10/2018 02:36 PM -0700, Fred J. Tydeman wrote:<br>
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite="">On Tue, 23 Oct 2018 12:06:37
-0700 Jim Thomas wrote:<br>
><br>
>My understanding is that 754-2019 does not intend for roundTiesToZero
to be a new user selectable rounding direction. <br><br>
Agreed.<br><br>
>C 7.31.4 already reserves the names with an FE_ prefix, so the names
would be available if a future revision of 754 added a user selectable
rounding direction. It wouldn't be appropriate for C to get in front of
754 on this.<br><br>
I was not clear. There is no requirement that anyone support
TiesToZero for<br>
anything other than the augmented operations. Therefore, there is
no<br>
requirement that any implementations define FE_TONEARESTTOZERO.<br>
However, if an implementation were to define such a user selectable <br>
rounding mode, I am asking that we specify the spelling of it
now.<br><br>
The other issue is:<br><br>
Given that there could be multiple different meanings for Round to
Nearest,<br>
what should FLT_ROUNDS be? Should FLT_ROUNDS have a value <br>
for each of the possible FE_* rounding macros? Should there be
a<br>
one-to-one mapping between FLT_ROUNDS and the FE_* rounding
modes?<br><br>
<br><br>
---<br>
Fred J. Tydeman Tydeman
Consulting<br>
tydeman@tybor.com Testing, numerics,
programming<br>
+1 (702) 608-6093 Vice-chair of PL22.11
(ANSI "C")<br>
Sample C99+FPCE tests:
<a href="http://www.tybor.com/" eudora="autourl">http://www.tybor.com</a>
<br>
Savers sleep well, investors eat well, spenders work forever.<br><br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Cfp-interest mailing list<br>
Cfp-interest@oakapple.net<br>
<a href="http://mailman.oakapple.net/mailman/listinfo/cfp-interest" eudora="autourl">
http://mailman.oakapple.net/mailman/listinfo/cfp-interest</a></font>
</blockquote></body>
</html>