Re: [sv-bc] RE: associativity of ** operator

From: Steven Sharp <sharp_at_.....>
Date: Wed Oct 28 2009 - 22:06:02 PDT
>When was ** added to 1364/1800?

In 1364-2001.

>Was associativity even considered?

I have a vague impression that I might have brought it up, but any
discussion would have been a decade ago by now.  If I did, I would
have suggested right-associativity, but would not have pushed hard
if others preferred to leave it consistent with the other binary
operators.

I was more concerned with other ** issues.  For example, whether the
operands should be self- or context-determined, whether we should
have a real**integer operation distinct from the real**real operation,
whether the exponent should be considered unsigned when the base was
integral, and what to produce in the various corner and error cases.


Steven Sharp
sharp@cadence.com


-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.
Received on Wed Oct 28 22:07:27 2009

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Wed Oct 28 2009 - 22:08:26 PDT