[Cfp-interest 2831] Re: CFP review of TS-4 revisions

[Fred J. Tydeman]

On Sun, 20 Aug 2023 10:51:31 -0700 Jim Thomas wrote:
>
>> 5.1 page 2, line 6:  Is there a problem with freestanding
>> implementations and <math.h> and trying to access the FP exception
>> flags? [C23 4.0 Conformance, paragraph 7]
>Is this a question about the TS or C? According to C23 4 #7 a strictly conforming program that defines __STDC_IEC_60559_BFP__ or __STDC_IEC_60559_DFP__ can't access exception flags because it can't set the FENV_ACCESS state to "on".

Should we add words to the TS in 5.1 to mention that access to the FP flags
may not be provided (so full conformance to the TS would not happen),

>> 6.0 page 3, line 8:  Why "may" for SNaN?
>Annex F doesn't require support for signaling NaNs. The TSes don't add a stricter requirement here.

Yes and no.  The *_SNAN macros are required to be supported.
But, FULL support is not required by C23 F.2.1#3.

Otherwise, I agree with your comments.

---
Fred J. Tydeman        Tydeman Consulting
tydeman at tybor.com      Testing, numerics, programming
+1 (702) 608-6093      Vice-chair of INCITS/C (ANSI "C")
Sample C17+FPCE tests: http://www.tybor.com
Savers sleep well, investors eat well, spenders work forever.