Also, IEEE 754 floating point standard guarantees the results of addition, subtraction, multiplication, division, and square root to be the exact correctly rounded value, ie a deterministic result, contrary to what he says.
> The IEEE 754-1985 allowed many variations in implementations (such as the encoding of some values and the detection of certain exceptions). IEEE 754-2008 has strengthened up many of these, but a few variations still remain (especially for binary formats). The reproducibility clause recommends that language standards should provide a means to write reproducible programs (i.e., programs that will produce the same result in all implementations of a language), and describes what needs to be done to achieve reproducible results.
Most developers prefer speed over reproducibility, and are encouraged to use denormal-to-zeros, fast-math optimizations, fused MAC, approximated square root function and whatever else is available to achieve results.
The IEEE754 standard provides a guarantee for deterministic results, and many multi-precision and interval arithmetic libraries depend on this guarantee to be true to function properly.
IEEE754 defines unique -infinity and +infinity values, and any "new and improved" standard that breaks this axiom is just incompatible with all existing floating-point libraries written in the last +30 years.
"These claims pander to Ignorance and Wishful Thinking." Kahan (main author of IEEE754) on Posits claims.
You're free to voice your own opinion, but I take some issue with people asserting theirs as if they speak for "most developers". Especially if it comes from a new account with a name like "Gustafnot". That doesn't exactly scream "unbiased" to me.
If you really want to claim the opposite, do you have evidence? Or experience that it’s true?
Yet electron is not only a thing for hobbyists, but something even large companies bet their livelihood on.
The vast majority of application dosen't need fine control of the FPU. There is always will be hardware for the few application need the ieee-754 features.
A 'softposit' implementation can at least let people experiment with writing posit algorithms to investigate the claimed algorithm-design benefits, even if it's not going to beat hardware floats in speed.
 The interval arithmetic people don't seem very happy with his comparisons though: http://frederic.goualard.net/publications/MR3329180.pdf