Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2022 10:35:25 +0000
On Mon, 21 Mar 2022 at 08:59, Jens Maurer via Liaison <
liaison_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> This appears to be an ill-formed submission to WG21.
>
> The paper does not contain (in its text) the WG21 paper number, and
> it does not contain an e-mail address to contact the author, let
> alone an author name (or a list thereof).
>
> Furthermore, the C++ standard defers the *_HAS_SUBNORM macros
> entirely to C; the only mention is in [cfloat.syn]:
>
> "The header <cfloat> defines all macros the same as the C standard
> library header <float.h>."
>
> Given the apparent continued absence of interest in the details of
> floating-point from C++, any changes here seem to be entirely in
> the realm of WG14.
>
There is some overlap with parts of
http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2022/p2551r0.pdf
regarding what "has_denorm" means for the new C++ traits. But the answer to
"what does the C macro mean?" and "what does the C++ trait mean?" should
not be the same, as they're actually asking different questions, and so the
proposed changes in this paper do not impact C++.
liaison_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> This appears to be an ill-formed submission to WG21.
>
> The paper does not contain (in its text) the WG21 paper number, and
> it does not contain an e-mail address to contact the author, let
> alone an author name (or a list thereof).
>
> Furthermore, the C++ standard defers the *_HAS_SUBNORM macros
> entirely to C; the only mention is in [cfloat.syn]:
>
> "The header <cfloat> defines all macros the same as the C standard
> library header <float.h>."
>
> Given the apparent continued absence of interest in the details of
> floating-point from C++, any changes here seem to be entirely in
> the realm of WG14.
>
There is some overlap with parts of
http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2022/p2551r0.pdf
regarding what "has_denorm" means for the new C++ traits. But the answer to
"what does the C macro mean?" and "what does the C++ trait mean?" should
not be the same, as they're actually asking different questions, and so the
proposed changes in this paper do not impact C++.
Received on 2022-03-21 10:35:37