[std-interval] C++ committee feedback

[George Corliss]

Sylvain,

Congratulations, and thanks to you and the rest of your team.

Can you point us to the most recent version of the proposal?

I would encourage you to send this report also to the reliable_computing
alias with a renewed invitation to subscribe here.

Dr. George F. Corliss
Electrical and Computer Engineering
Marquette University
PO Box 1881 
1515 W. Wisconsin Ave.
Milwaukee WI 53201-1881 USA
414-288-6599; Fax: 288-5579; Dept. 288-6280
Office: Haggerty Engineering 296
George.Corliss at Marquette.edu


> 
> I just raised the issue in front of the Library Working Group
> of the ISO C++ committee, with the help of Steve.
> 
> The feedback is positive and encouraging.  A straw poll has been
> taken, on whether we should continue the effort :
> Strongly in favor = 4
> Weakly   in favor = 5
> Weakly   against  = 0
> Strongly against  = 0
> 
> The question was also raised whether we should target C++0x or TR2,
> the preference is for TR2 (10 votes against 1).
> 
> [
>    TR2 is a non-normative document which serves as explicit exposure of
>    the intent of the committee for the next standard.
>    TRs are usually also implemented by compiler vendors and serve to make
>    sure users are really happy with the specification before the final
>    blessing.
>    C++0x is the code-name for the next standard.
> ]
> 
> 
> The goal is now to reach a consensus here and have a revision of the
> proposal for the next meeting, beginning of october 2006.
> 
> 
> We also discussed 2 issues briefly:
> - pass-by-value versus pass-by-ref has already been debated by the
>    committee for std::complex.  Seems like the debate was as hot as
>    it is for intervals.  That's an issue for the committee.
> - there are still concerns on the exact list of functions that we
>    will propose, we need to make sure we have the good set (sufficiently
>    useful, specified with enough details such as the width of intervals,
>    and taking into account the difficulty of implementation).
> 
> 
> Steve, please correct me if I did not get something correctly or if you
> want to add something.