This is the mail archive of the
libstdc++@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the libstdc++ project.
Re: [libstdc++] numeric_limits: round_style, round_error
- From: Phil Edwards <phil at jaj dot com>
- To: Gabriel Dos Reis <gdr at integrable-solutions dot net>
- Cc: Richard Henderson <rth at twiddle dot net>, Mark Mitchell <mark at codesourcery dot com>, "libstdc++ at gcc dot gnu dot org" <libstdc++ at gcc dot gnu dot org>, "gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Wed, 2 Oct 2002 22:42:37 -0400
- Subject: Re: [libstdc++] numeric_limits: round_style, round_error
- References: <20020921153114.A2149@twiddle.net> <120460000.1032722841@warlock.codesourcery.com> <20020922124314.A8266@twiddle.net> <m3it0xztx0.fsf@soliton.integrable-solutions.net>
On Sun, Sep 22, 2002 at 09:49:31PM +0200, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
> Richard Henderson <rth@twiddle.net> writes:
> | On Sun, Sep 22, 2002 at 12:27:21PM -0700, Mark Mitchell wrote:
>
> | > However, we should point out in case somebody cares.
> |
> | Where's the best place to put this information?
>
> Probably in our non-existent numeric_limits<> documentation web-pages.
And/or doxygen comments in the code.
> I see C has documentations for implementation defined behaviour and
> constants. We could do the same for C++ there.
Indeed, we must do the same.
http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/libstdc++/17_intro/howto.html#5
is a start, but only for the library end of things.
Phil
--
I would therefore like to posit that computing's central challenge, viz. "How
not to make a mess of it," has /not/ been met.
- Edsger Dijkstra, 1930-2002