J3/06-340
Date: 31 October 2006
To: J3
From: Dick Hendrickson
Subject: Clause 4 BITS problems
References: J3/06-007R1, 06-278
This is a reworking of the bits parts of paper 06-278 which was
deferred from meeting 177.
[53:30] Must the additional representation methods be dense
like the ones up to 4*(integer size) are. Or,
could a processor allow 1 through 128 and then 143
and 231?
[54:27-28] Is this what we want? For integers surely all
processors overflow for
9999999999999_TwoByteKind.
Ditto for 1.0E666666666666_IEEEsingle.
Why would anyone want to just use the right hand
bits of a typed constant? If we really want to
allow a digits from a constant to be thrown away
from the left, then [41:12-13] should be reworded to
say that bit values are not completely specified.