From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 101deb,87f6968ed41c9df1 X-Google-Attributes: gid101deb,public X-Google-Thread: f43e6,5ac12f5a60b1bfe X-Google-Attributes: gidf43e6,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,5ac12f5a60b1bfe X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: Ken Garlington Subject: Re: Ada versus PL/I (was: Re: Ariane 5 - not an exception?) Date: 1996/09/09 Message-ID: <3233D677.4399@lmtas.lmco.com>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 179452511 references: <50dkud$t7h@goanna.cs.rmit.edu.au> <51009c$n28@goanna.cs.rmit.edu.au> content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii organization: Lockheed Martin Tactical Aircraft Systems mime-version: 1.0 newsgroups: comp.software-eng,comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.pl1 x-mailer: Mozilla 2.02 (Macintosh; I; 68K) Date: 1996-09-09T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: Robert Dewar wrote: > > Robin says > > " SQRT is well-defined in a range of languages. > It's sufficiently well-used that it be available > with a routine call, definitely facilitated > when it's part of the language, as indeed it should be." > > No, sorry that's plain wrong, in languages like Fortran, sqrt is not > well-defined at all, no more than addition (for float) is well defined > in such languages. The last I remember, PL/I did not have any properly > defined floating-point semantics either (the standard was too early > to be significantly influenced by either IEEE or LIAS). I suspect > Robin is not a floating-point expert! Keep in mind that Robin's definition of "well-defined" is probably more along the lines of "it's listed in the index of my vendor's compiler manual." I don't really see Robin using such terms with much precision (pun intended). -- LMTAS - "Our Brand Means Quality"