[Cfp-interest] C Standard meeting 18661 DR's result

[Rajan Bhakta]

Re numbering: I talked to Blaine today and he said he meant it the way 
Fred is saying.
So all DR's against part 1 are named DR1-<defect number>.
Defects against part 2 are named DR2-<defect number>, etc.

Regards,

Rajan Bhakta
z/OS XL C/C++ Compiler Technical Architect
ISO C Standards Representative for Canada
C Compiler Development
Contact: rbhakta at us.ibm.com, Rajan Bhakta/Houston/IBM



From:   "Fred J. Tydeman" <tydeman at tybor.com>
To:     Rajan Bhakta/Houston/IBM at IBMUS
Cc:     cfp-interest at oakapple.net
Date:   04/12/2016 07:28 AM
Subject:        Re: [Cfp-interest] C Standard meeting 18661 DR's result



Quoting Rajan Bhakta <rbhakta at us.ibm.com>:

> Hi,
>
> In the C meeting, the review of the proposed defects and resolutions for
> the IEEE 754 C binding Technical Specification came up with the 
following:
>
>   TS 18661 DR's: [N 2029]
>     TS18661-1:
>     1) Marked as DR1-1
>     2) Marked as DR2-1
>     3) Editorial. Can be published with a TC.
>     4) Marked as DR3-1

C11 DR 477 mentions that there should be a DR against TS 18661-1.
Is such a DR needed?  Did we do that?

Also, I think the DR numbering above is backwards.
I think it should be DR1-1, DR1-2, DR1-3
(that is, part number-DR number).
-- 
Fred J. Tydeman        Tydeman Consulting
tydeman at tybor.com      Testing, numerics, programming
+1 (775) 358-9748      Vice-chair of J11 (ANSI "C")
Sample C99+FPCE tests: http://www.tybor.com
Savers sleep well, investors eat well, spenders work forever.




-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.oakapple.net/pipermail/cfp-interest/attachments/20160412/b9dffee3/attachment.html