You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
It seems that the synopsis indicates unnecessary uncertainty. E.g., whenever std::float16_t is supported, we can always declare typedef-name as using float16_t = decltype(0.0f16);.
It doesn't make much sense to document the exact spelling used by the implementation, on which the difference is unobservable. And it should be possible to replace the implementation-defined parts with certain decltype-specifiers (namely decltype(0.0f16), decltype(0.0f32), decltype(0.0f64), decltype(0.0f128), and decltype(0.0bf16) or somthing like).
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
It seems that the synopsis indicates unnecessary uncertainty. E.g., whenever
std::float16_t
is supported, we can always declare typedef-name asusing float16_t = decltype(0.0f16);
.It doesn't make much sense to document the exact spelling used by the implementation, on which the difference is unobservable. And it should be possible to replace the implementation-defined parts with certain decltype-specifiers (namely
decltype(0.0f16)
,decltype(0.0f32)
,decltype(0.0f64)
,decltype(0.0f128)
, anddecltype(0.0bf16)
or somthing like).The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: