Re: [lmi] [lmi-commits] master ee120a2d 1/3: Improve documentation; add 'const'

[Vadim Zeitlin]

On Fri, 3 Jun 2022 01:54:24 +0000 Greg Chicares <gchicares@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

GC> On 5/28/22 14:36, Vadim Zeitlin wrote:
GC> > On Fri, 27 May 2022 20:49:10 -0400 (EDT) Greg Chicares 
<gchicares@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
GC> [...]
GC> > GC>     As an extension, gcc would allow
GC> > GC>     -            static T const z0 = std::pow
GC> > GC>     +            constexpr T z0 = std::pow
GC> > GC>     but not all compilers support that.
GC> > 
GC> >  And looking at https://github.com/cplusplus/papers/issues/168 it seems
GC> > quite likely that they won't support it even in C++23, unfortunately. This
GC> > is really disappointing, I wanted to reply to this message saying that 
soon
GC> > they will, but I was clearly over-optimistic.
GC> 
GC> Expressing myself with somewhat less reserve: what's holding them back?

 I have no idea, the above is best/only source information I have.

 Generally speaking, a lot of things in C++ don't happen because there are
not enough resources, so I guess it's the most likely explanation for this
one too. And perhaps nobody feels strongly enough about it to push it
sufficiently hard. Personally, I find it rather surprising, because this
seems very useful to me, but I'm definitely not going to volunteer for
doing it myself neither, so I'm not going to judge.

GC> I want a ln implementation that's correctly rounded to nearest or even;
GC> does anyone care about one that rounds correctly toward +infinity?

 Well, maybe? If it were up to me, I'd remove support for any non-default
rounding completely, but the fact that this hasn't been done yet probably
indicates that some people do use it.

 Or maybe it's just due to lack of resources, of course...
VZ

pgpdZqynqReiT.pgp
Description: PGP signature