ISO/ IEC JTC1/SC22/WG21 N0797

 
                  Title: Open Issues for Numeric Libraries (Clause 26)
                  Author: Judy Ward
                  Document Number: X3J16/95-0197
                                   WG21/N0797
 
Work Group:     Library
Issue Number:   26/007
Title: cleanup of Chapter 26
Section:        26 New
Status:         active
Description:
 
Editorial changes:
 
Section 26.5
     The added signatures list at the end is incomplete.
     It only includes the the float ones, not the long
     double functions mentioned in the previous sentence.
 
     Why does the double abs(double) have a comment that says fabs?
     I'm not sure what this comment or the labs() or ldiv() comments
     mean.
 
     Shouldn't the last two prototypes be:
     float abs(float);
     float pow(float, int);
 
Resolution:
 
Requestor:  Judy Ward
Owner:         Judy Ward
Emails: (email reflector messages that discuss this issue)
Papers: (committee documents that discuss this issue)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Work Group:     Library
Issue Number:   26/008
Title: algebraic structures as traits
Section:        26 New
Status:         active
Description:
 
From:	Takanori Adachi <taka@miwa.co.jp>
Date:	30-Jun-1995 2324 -0500" 30-JUN-1995 23:22:47.04
CC:	taka@miwa.co.jp
Subj:	field_traits
 
 
To: C++ libraries mailing list
Message c++std-lib-3819
 
The following is an idea to specify algebraic structures by the traits
parameterized with the underlying set T.
 
  template <class T> struct field_traits {}; // abstraction of field structure
 
  struct field_traits<float> { // a specialization for 'float'
  typedef float scalar_type;
 
  // fundamental field operators
  static bool eq(const scalar_type s1, const scalar_type s2)
     { return (s1 == s2); }
  static scalar_type plus(const scalar_type s1, const scalar_type s2)
     { return s1 + s2; }
  ...
  // and special functions
  static scalar_type sin_f(const scalar s) { return sin(s); }
  ...
  // and constants
  static scalar_type pi() { return 3.141592; }
  ...
  };
 
  // fundamental field operators
  static bool eq(const scalar_type s1, const scalar_type s2)
     { return (s1 == s2); }
  static scalar_type plus(const scalar_type s1, const scalar_type s2)
     { return s1 + s2; }
  ...
  // and special functions
  static scalar_type sin_f(const scalar s) { return sin(s); }
  ...
  // and constants
  static scalar_type pi() { return 3.14159265358979; }
    // more precise than that of float;
  ...
  };
 
Using these structure specifying traits, we can define several numeric
operators.
 
  template<class T, class traits> complex<T,traits>
    operator+(const complex<T,traits>& c1, const complex<T,traits>& c2) {
      return complex(
        traits:plus(c1.real(), c2.real()),
        traits:plus(c1.imag(), c2.imag()) );
    }
 
 
  template<class T, class traits> complex<T,traits>
    exp(const complex<T,traits>& c) {
      // use Euler's theorem and traits::exp_f, sin_f, cos_f.
    }
 
The classes complex and valarray over an field T are also defined as:
 
  template<class T, class traits = field_traits<T> >
  class complex { ... };
  template<class T, class traits = field_traits<T> > class valarray;
 
Resolution:
Requestor:  Takanori Adachi
Owner:         Judy Ward
Emails: (email reflector messages that discuss this issue)
c++std-lib-3820
c++std-lib-3821
c++std-lib-3832
c++std-lib-3835
Papers: (committee documents that discuss this issue)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Work Group:     Library
Issue Number:   26/009
Title: valarray usefulness
Section:        26 New
Status:         active
Description:
 
From:	ncm@netcom.com (Nathan Myers)
Date:	24-Jul-1995 1608 -0500" 24-JUL-1995 16:07:47.61
CC:	alv@roguewave.com,keffer@roguewave.com,vandevod@cs.rpi.edu
Subj:	valarray
 
To: C++ libraries mailing list
Message c++std-lib-3881
 
 
In ANSI public comment T29, David Vandevoorde <vandevod@cs.rpi.edu> says:
 
>                 Comments on the proposed <valarray> header
> ...
> Probably the simplest way to address the above concerns is to simply
> abandon the standardization of a numerical array.
 
I would like to take this alternative seriously.
 
With the advent of Todd Veldhuizen's work on Expression Templates,
it is far from clear that valarray<> is the appropriate vehicle to
aid in optimizing numeric array processing in C++.  (For those who
have not read Veldhuizen's work in C++ Report, a copy may be found
at <http://www.roguewave.com/>.)  His work implies that using even
a vendor-optimized/compiler-supported valarray<> may cost a factor
of two or more in speed compared to using another library based on
portable language facilities.  This brings into question the value
of the valarray<> template; the original argument in its favor was
that it provided the hooks to permit optimal implementation "under
the hood" (that's "under the bonnet" for you Brits).
 
This is not a formal proposal to eliminate valarray<>, yet; it is
instead a request for comments.  I would like particularly to hear
from ISO representatives whose vote might be forced to change if
it is removed.
 
Nathan Myers
myersn@roguewave.com
 
 
Resolution:
 
Requestor:  Nathan Myers
Owner:         Judy Ward
Emails: (email reflector messages that discuss this issue)
c++std-lib-3880
c++std-lib-3883
c++std-lib-3886
c++std-lib-3887
c++std-lib-3889
c++std-lib-3897
c++std-lib-3900
c++std-lib-3906
c++std-lib-3908
c++std-lib-3909
c++std-lib-3910
c++std-lib-3914
c++std-lib-3918
c++std-lib-3920
c++std-lib-3925
 
Papers: (committee documents that discuss this issue)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Work Group:     Library
Issue Number:   26/010
Title: basic_complex
Section:        26 New
Status:         active
Description:
Resolution:
From:	Dag Bruck <dag@dynasim.se>
Date:	16-AUG-1995 07:47:07.55
Subj:	Complex datatype
 
To: C++ libraries mailing list
Message c++std-lib-3962
 
I support
 
	template <class scalar> class basic_complex {
		// .....
	};
 
	typedef basic_complex<double> complex;
 
(1) This is similar to basic_string.
(2) It maintains compatibility with current implementations.
(3) It satisfies 98% of all use of complex, i.e., I claim
    that other complex types are rare in practice.
(4) There is no generally known prior art for naming other
    complex types that I'm aware of.
 
					-- Dag
 
Requestor:  Dag Bruck
Owner:         Judy Ward
Emails: (email reflector messages that discuss this issue)
c++std-lib-3963
c++std-lib-3964
c++std-lib-3965
c++std-lib-3966
c++std-lib-3970
c++std-lib-3971
c++std-lib-3977
c++std-lib-3978
c++std-lib-3981
c++std-lib-3987
c++std-lib-3988
c++std-lib-3922
c++std-lib-4004
c++std-lib-4006
c++std-lib-4009
c++std-lib-4051
c++std-lib-4077
 
Papers: (committee documents that discuss this issue)