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=-0.8 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_DATE autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,da29ac1b3f986998 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 1994-12-11 04:02:20 PST Path: bga.com!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!gatech!swiss.ans.net!cmcl2!thecourier.cims.nyu.edu!thecourier.cims.nyu.edu!nobody From: dewar@cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar) Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: intermediate results causing constraint errors Date: 10 Dec 1994 08:41:16 -0500 Organization: Courant Institute of Mathematical Sciences Message-ID: <3ccb5s$710@gnat.cs.nyu.edu> References: <3bn3l9$pa2@gnat.cs.nyu.edu> <3c1pk6$jk4@gnat.cs.nyu.edu> <1994Dec7.121726.26918@sei.cmu.edu> NNTP-Posting-Host: gnat.cs.nyu.edu Date: 1994-12-10T08:41:16-05:00 List-Id: The idea of Fortran users getting confused by the Brown model does not hold water for a second. Fortran has no arithmetic model, and Fortran programmers do not think in terms of such models. The actual code generated by an Ada compiler will be no different from that generated by a Fortran compiler with respect to numeric operations in practice. Remember that the Brown model has essentially ZERO effect on the generated code of an Ada compiler, and also remember that the change to the floating point model in Ada 9X will also in practice have zero effect on the generated code. As for the fixed-point "anomoly", this is only anomolous i you don't understand fixed-point, and a good rule is not to use that which you do not understand. You will always get surprised if you try to use things you don't understand, and only in that sense would I agree that Ada 83 is full of little surprises in numerics.