Issue 18203: VSIPL++ spec references nonexistent complex<int> types (vsiplxx-rtf)
Source:  (Mr. Brooks Moses, brooks.moses(at)dpdx.net)
Nature: Revision
Severity: Minor
Summary: The specification defines complex_i as "The implementation shall define
this type to be complex<short>, complex<int>, or complex<long int> such
that the choice of underlying type is the same as scalar_i."


This is problematic, because the C++ spec states that complex<T> is not
necessarily defined when T is not float or double.  In practice, GCC
provides only incomplete definitions for the int/short/long cases.


Since cscalar_i is only used in a very few places, I suggest that it
should simply be removed from the spec.


(The changelog in the back of the document mentions a change related to
this, but the actual text does not appear to be changed.)


Resolution: In the interest of closing the current RTF so that the solutions to resolved issues can be made publically available, this issue is deferred to the next RTF.
Disposition: Deferred
Revised Text: 
Actions taken:
October 23, 2012: received issue
Discussion: 

End of Annotations:=====
te: Tue, 23 Oct 2012 10:59:41 -0700
From: Brooks Moses <brooks_moses@mentor.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:10.0.2) Gecko/20120216 Thunderbird/10.0.2
To: <issues@omg.org>
Subject: VSIPL++ issue (#8 from me)
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 23 Oct 2012 17:59:41.0696 (UTC) FILETIME=[2D27D800:01CDB148]


Name:            Brooks Moses
Employer:        Mentor Graphics
mailFrom:        brooks_moses@mentor.com
Terms_Agreement: I agree
Specification:   VSIPL++
Section:         3.2 [support.types]
FormalNumber:    ptc/2012-07-27
Version:         1.2 - FTF Beta 1
Doc_Year:        2012
Doc_Month:       August
Doc_Day:         10
Page:            8
Title:           VSIPL++ spec references nonexistent complex<int> types
Nature:          Bug
Severity:        Minor
B1:              Report Issue


Description:


The specification defines complex_i as "The implementation shall define
this type to be complex<short>, complex<int>, or complex<long int> such
that the choice of underlying type is the same as scalar_i."


This is problematic, because the C++ spec states that complex<T> is not
necessarily defined when T is not float or double.  In practice, GCC
provides only incomplete definitions for the int/short/long cases.


Since cscalar_i is only used in a very few places, I suggest that it
should simply be removed from the spec.


(The changelog in the back of the document mentions a change related to
this, but the actual text does not appear to be changed.)

- Brooks