Re: [Json] WGLC comment about numeric values

Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com> Fri, 11 October 2013 20:51 UTC

Return-Path: <tbray@textuality.com>
X-Original-To: json@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: json@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4E17211E80F9 for <json@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 11 Oct 2013 13:51:49 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.086
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.086 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.110, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Ud2yVVh7BuaC for <json@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 11 Oct 2013 13:51:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-vc0-f176.google.com (mail-vc0-f176.google.com [209.85.220.176]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6AB7F11E819A for <json@ietf.org>; Fri, 11 Oct 2013 13:51:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-vc0-f176.google.com with SMTP id ik5so1195993vcb.21 for <json@ietf.org>; Fri, 11 Oct 2013 13:51:41 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=A9RtEOK8L1VJnpaNjfpzYk02Bqb/9exxTtQzgRpJ6jE=; b=AvcnUF8DtaTqqZxFAT1jZDdPzs3pDcZI8yOJhEo8GUjwXcXUkjfRV9sCpXQF16XNy5 ggYvma85ac59+gLGqUtvBp60oQyd/rttdHEc+SPy+lAMOxwwdlq8PTwwGVftKj5NdmCK mUKioLey2xKZopUehLjWwUQn+VPqNH0fQYofU8prYjCpDrqE3CY328Tsx2EWLqdQvArN AVgL7lMF/jJHUUOxgr2wpxZE6PDJSi4h/KQM7tqp2CC7peU9RHZqcEL5DvyWHWmcOULA +uZlvQxrJdU/Q8fgd5xQwxzltY7VrByzGqNQbUAttRVhgYvPF/rSJKpDadJYB1fAoZKt 8FDQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQldPPkbneiBKsSFgVWj6jB58KAGd6Iuk6uGNBVUVQoXgmrdzsGSw4ejijUVcJ+BSCxclsRE
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.52.231.5 with SMTP id tc5mr2306974vdc.36.1381524701783; Fri, 11 Oct 2013 13:51:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.220.174.197 with HTTP; Fri, 11 Oct 2013 13:51:41 -0700 (PDT)
X-Originating-IP: [96.49.81.176]
In-Reply-To: <CAK3OfOhUtrd91SiLrnG=5xoNnvPGfgi4EPLwzU=jV=9oHHS4_g@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAK3OfOhUtrd91SiLrnG=5xoNnvPGfgi4EPLwzU=jV=9oHHS4_g@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2013 13:51:41 -0700
Message-ID: <CAHBU6isQgyO-qai2w61T-XJoLua+u9QAneXm=doweYSRvrVz-w@mail.gmail.com>
From: Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com>
To: Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e01176b43193d1304e87d49b5
Cc: "json@ietf.org" <json@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Json] WGLC comment about numeric values
X-BeenThere: json@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: "JavaScript Object Notation \(JSON\) WG mailing list" <json.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/json>, <mailto:json-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/json>
List-Post: <mailto:json@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:json-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/json>, <mailto:json-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2013 20:51:49 -0000

Actually, I think the language should be adjusted to say, rather than
generally “supports IEEE754”, more specifically “supports IEEE765 64-bit
binary (double precision) numbers.  Then the rest falls into place.


On Fri, Oct 11, 2013 at 12:35 PM, Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com>wrote;wrote:

>    Note that when such software is used, numbers which are integers and
>    are in the range [-(2**53)+1, (2**53)-1] are interoperable in the
>    sense that implementations will agree exactly on their numeric
>    values.
>
> s/implementations will/implementations most likely will/
>
> (Because there are implementations that only support 32-bit integers.)
> _______________________________________________
> json mailing list
> json@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/json
>