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: 103376,5ac12f5a60b1bfe X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Thread: f43e6,5ac12f5a60b1bfe X-Google-Attributes: gidf43e6,public From: rav@goanna.cs.rmit.edu.au (++ robin) Subject: Re: Ada versus PL/I (was: Re: Ariane 5 - not an exception?) Date: 1996/09/09 Message-ID: <51009c$n28@goanna.cs.rmit.edu.au>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 179370581 expires: 15 November 1996 00:00:00 GMT references: <50dkud$t7h@goanna.cs.rmit.edu.au> organization: Comp Sci, RMIT, Melbourne, Australia newsgroups: comp.software-eng,comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.pl1 nntp-posting-user: rav Date: 1996-09-09T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: dewar@cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar) writes: >I would definitely give in to this temptation (and say that a language >that does not require a definition for sqrt is deficient). In the absence >of a commitment to IEEE semantics, the definition of sqrt is not well >defined at the language level, ---I wonder what language(s) you are speaking about? 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. >and it is better that it come from a >designated library whose semantics are well defined (note that math.h >does not meet that requirement anyway, but certainly the math libraries >in Ada do meet this requirement).