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=0.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID, REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,ec68713820981fe9 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: William A Whitaker Subject: Re: SI Units Solicitation - Upgrade from comments Date: 1997/08/22 Message-ID: <33FD168C.3D4D@erols.com>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 267804329 References: <33FBD411.3B4A@erols.com> Organization: Erol's Internet Services X-Received-On: 22 Aug 1997 04:34:21 GMT Reply-To: whitaker@erols.com Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 1997-08-22T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: Robert Dewar wrote: > > < only > the use of the numeric type Real, defined elsewhere.>> > > I guess this is really a complaint at the P1446 standard (which I do not > have a copy of), but I really dislike the use of the term Real, as opposed > to Float, in programming languages. It just serves to feed confusion of the > kind that has been so evident in the separate thread on guidelines for use > of floating-point arithmetic. For this applications standard, the user is restricted to a single 15-digit floating type. It must be a subtype of the appropriate implementation type (rather than "is digits 15") since this application must smoothly interact with other applications. The standard then expends/derives/employs the type. The standard calls that type Real. It cannot be called Float. In most compilers it is probably a subtype of Long_Float, but you cannot count on that. I would be delighted to consider another term, if it can be generally agreed upon. (I do not believe that the users would be happy with a multisyballic name, like AdaTPD_Float, or even Float_15). So far the only one that has won acceptance (besides Float) is "Real". Whitaker