[Cfp-interest 2506] Re: Fwd: Editorial review

[Rajan Bhakta]

My comments:

Clause 4#7:
  "and the strto * floating-point" -> "and the strto* floating-point"
  (There should be no space between the strto and the *)
7.24.1.3#2
  Missing end of paragraph line saying "Use of these functions with any other format string results in undefined behavior." from published part 1.
  Note that it is present in 7.24.1.4#2 though does not say the non-negative part in #3 (which was not in published part 1).
7.24.1.5#3 last bullet:
  Seems to have the grammar term "n-char-sequence:" on the same line instead of a new line.

Regards,

Rajan Bhakta
z/OS XL C/C++ Compiler Technical Architect
ISO C Standards Representative (Canada, USA), PL22.11 Chair
C/C++ Compiler Development
rbhakta at us.ibm.com

IBM

From: Jim Thomas <jaswthomas at sbcglobal.net>
Date: Thursday, August 4, 2022 at 10:26 PM
To: Mike Cowlishaw <mfc at speleotrove.com>, Damian McGuckin <damianm at esi.com.au>, Rajan Bhakta <rbhakta at us.ibm.com>, "Fred J. Tydeman" <tydeman.fred at gmail.com>
Cc: CFP <cfp-interest at ucbtest.org>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Fwd: Editorial review

Fred, Rajan, Mike, and Damian, thanks for volunteering to help with the C23 CD draft review. Others may yet volunteer to review parts of the draft or review our comments. Please find a link to the draft at the bottom of David Keaton’s message
ZjQcmQRYFpfptBannerStart
This Message Is From an External Sender
This message came from outside your organization.
ZjQcmQRYFpfptBannerEnd
Fred, Rajan, Mike, and Damian, thanks for volunteering to help with the C23 CD draft review. Others may yet volunteer to review parts of the draft or review our comments. Please find a link to the draft at the bottom of David Keaton’s message forwarded below.

For all reviewers, let's review our comments at the next CFP meeting on Friday, August 12, to decide which ones to submit to WG14 now (by Monday, August 15) and which to put on the CFP errata list for the next C revision. As you find errors please email them to cfp-interest at ucbtest.org<mailto:cfp-interest at ucbtest.org>.

- Jim Thomas

Begin forwarded message:

From: David Keaton <dmk at dmk.com<mailto:dmk at dmk.com>>
Subject: Editorial review
Date: August 4, 2022 at 4:47:25 PM PDT
To: Aaron Ballman <aaron at aaronballman.com<mailto:aaron at aaronballman.com>>, Rajan Bhakta <rbhakta at us.ibm.com<mailto:rbhakta at us.ibm.com>>, Alex Gilding <agilding at perforce.com<mailto:agilding at perforce.com>>, Jens Gustedt <jens.gustedt at inria.fr<mailto:jens.gustedt at inria.fr>>, Joseph Myers <joseph at codesourcery.com<mailto:joseph at codesourcery.com>>, Miguel Ojeda <miguel.ojeda.sandonis at gmail.com<mailto:miguel.ojeda.sandonis at gmail.com>>, Robert Seacord <rcseacord at gmail.com<mailto:rcseacord at gmail.com>>, Jim Thomas <jaswthomas at sbcglobal.net<mailto:jaswthomas at sbcglobal.net>>, "Fred J. Tydeman" <tydeman at tybor.com<mailto:tydeman at tybor.com>>
Cc: JeanHeyd Meneide <phdofthehouse at gmail.com<mailto:phdofthehouse at gmail.com>>, Freek Wiedijk <freek at cs.ru.nl<mailto:freek at cs.ru.nl>>

    Thanks to everyone who volunteered to serve as editorial reviewers for the draft C standard before it is sent for CD ballot.  I've attached the latest draft of the standard and the editor's report.

    I've appended "_draft" to the filenames because there is a chance they will get new document numbers, but they will probably end up with the ones in the filenames.  In any case, these are the files to review.

    The primary purpose is to find out if the most recent changes to the draft match the documents that were voted into the standard.  If you happen to notice anything editorial that needs correcting while looking at that, please do mention it.  However making sure the draft matches the papers that were voted in takes priority.

    While doing this, if you notice any other non-editorial errors, feel free to report them.  Depending on what they are, we might send another cycle through WG 14, or we might want them to be addressed with NB comments.  However, again, making sure the draft matches the voted-in papers is more important.  There will be plenty of time to review other things during the CD ballot.

    Thanks again for volunteering.  I would appreciate it if you would have all your comments in by the end of Monday, August 15, after which there will be some editing time, and then the CD ballot.

David

N3048<https://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n3048.htm> 2022/08/04 Meneide, Editor's Report (Committee Draft Ballot)
N3047<https://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n3047.pdf> 2022/08/04 Meneide, Working Draft (Committee Draft Ballot)


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.oakapple.net/pipermail/cfp-interest/attachments/20220805/2684c632/attachment-0001.htm>