(j3.2006) (SC22WG5.4175) [ukfortran] Urgent: letter ballot on interps
Wed Feb 10 14:36:14 EST 2010
On Feb 10 2010, Bill Long wrote:
>> I believe
>>> that Fred (and maybe Nick) would be happy of the name of the function
>>> were something other than HYPOT, to avoid confusion with the IEEE
>>> HYPOT function.
>> It would assuredly be less confusing.
>The potential for confusion is greater in F08. In the context of the
>F03 standard (against which the interp is formally filed), one could
>argue that only "experts" who knew about HYPOT from elsewhere would be
>confused. In F08 we actually have an intrinsic function with this name
>and the same argument list. The temptation to assume the Note is
>referring to the same function as the one specified in Clause 13 seems
>quite high to me.
I would put it more strongly! Yes, please rename it. HYPOTENUSE would
More information about the J3