Unum II announcement

[H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d]

On Sun, Sep 25, 2016 at 02:22:01AM +0000, Nick B via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> On Saturday, 24 September 2016 at 12:56:48 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
> 
> > 
> > From what I read in the freely-available materials on Unum (actually
> > I also skimmed the book) it seems to me Unum is predicated on a
> > hardware implementation. It seems there would be little interest in
> > a slow software emulation. -- Andrei
> 
> Andrei
> 
> I suggest that now, programmers would/may have a choice: be slow and
> correct, or fast and incorrect, and that would depend if real accuracy
> is important or not, the types of problems being work on, and cost of
> failure.  (see examples in John Powerpoint presentation).
> 
> But I will ask John G, on the types of users showing interest in
> UNUMS.
[...]

I stand by my previous comment that I think Unum II should be a library
implementation in D. It's too early to know whether it will ultimately
be the way to go, so adding it to the language (along with all the
associated complexity and maintenance costs) doesn't seem like the way
to go here. Even putting it into Phobos, I think it's a bit premature. A
dub package seems like the best approach at present. I would be quite
interested in such a library solution, FWIW. If it turns out to be a
good idea, then we can consider putting it into Phobos, or perhaps even
the language.  But let's not jump the gun here.


T

-- 
Give me some fresh salted fish, please.