James Giles <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
...
>Or, more to the point:
>
> However, should the temporary location not have the same
> representation, for example a Fortran processor using registers
> with a precision larger than the precision of SUM, then a processor
> making such an optimization would not be conforming.
Whoops!! I now find that I was looking at a preliminary version of the
interpretation. The above sentence was removed from the approved
version. (I told you I had trouble finding this stuff.)
The fact that this requirement was explicitly *removed* from the
interpretation may very well indicate that the committee either
wanted to allow it, or leave the issue for another day. Who knows
which?
--
J. Giles
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|