[std-interval] New draft available (aka "Revision 1.5")

[Ron Avitzur]

Hello,

Pages 5,8:
Where it mentions integral and decimal floating point types, 
set<interval> and valarray<interval>, consider also mentioning 
complex intervals. Though it is outside the scope of this proposal, 
complex<interval<double>> might be arguably useful. It happens to 
compile without error the last time I checked, though the standard 
does not require std::complex to work with user-defined types. Is 
this a future direction? Is the implementation too difficult? Are 
there  existing implementations of complex intervals? Is the problem 
too poorly understood for standardization? If 
complex<interval<double>> happens to compile and generate apparently 
useful code in an implementation, is there any reason to warn a naive 
user against it?


Page 6:
Could you elaborate on why wrap-around intervals are specifically 
disallowed? Could that be left as an implementation choice and QOI 
issue? Though it would necessarily complicate implementations a great 
deal, would allowing it require any changes to the standard aside 
from the definitions of inf and sup in 26.6.11?


Pages 13,28:
Should atanh and atan2 also be overloaded to indicate if the function 
is undefined or discontinuous across its argument?


Page 19:
Should "any value" be "every value" in describing bool_set 
comparisons which return true and false? (The wording of the set 
description used for the Certainly comparisons are clearer and 
unambiguous.)


Page 25:
Is a domain restriction needed on the definition of atanh?


Page 35:
Links in references [2], [12], and [14] are 404.


Thank you again for all the work you've done!

Best regards,

Ron Avitzur