[Cfp-interest 2189] Re: AI for feraiseexcept update

[Damian McGuckin]

On Sun, 3 Oct 2021, Jim Thomas wrote:

> Please review and send any comments ASAP:
> 
> https://wiki.edg.com/pub/CFP/WebHome/C23_proposal_-_feraiseexcept_update-20
> 211003.pdf

It is very clear.

But, if I was raising say INEXACT and OVERFLOW, if would

 	a)	grab the exception flags from the FPU rgister

 	b)	update the in-core copy with both,

 	c)	send them back as a single operation to the FPU register,

Most implementations do this. Your words as they stand would render most 
of these non-compliant overnight. And if you wanted to force people to 
send 2 separate and consecutive updates to the FPU register, you would get 
push-back at the very least although I would anticipate much worse.

Could you write (my changes in CAPS as I have only a black a white mail
program so I am not yelling),

 	.... then overflow is raised before OR CONCURRENTLY WITH
 	"inexact". Similarly ....

 	.... then "underflow" is raised before OR CONCURRENTLY WITH
 	"inexact".

I have avoided the word co-incident. Concurrently has an obvious and
non-technical meaning.

If you do not like that, how about just changing the word

 	before
to
 	guaranteed to not be after

My 2c.

Stay safe - Damian

Pacific Engineering Systems International, 277-279 Broadway, Glebe NSW 2037
Ph:+61-2-8571-0847 .. Fx:+61-2-9692-9623 | unsolicited email not wanted here
Views & opinions here are mine and not those of any past or present employer