[Cfp-interest 3012] Re: C23 editorial review draft

[Jim Thomas]

Below are my responses so far.

- Jim Thomas

> On Feb 23, 2024, at 6:29 PM, Jim Thomas <jaswthomas at sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> 
> CFP team,
…

> I think the CFP related comments in n3216 are:
> 
> ** -002
Ok

> **- 016 
Ok

> **- 024
Ok, except …
Appropriate changes of “negating” to “arithmetically negating” were not made:
6.4.4.3 #12 (3 instances)
7.3.9.4 #2 Change “negating the sign of its imaginary part” to “arithmetically negating its imaginary part”.
Footnote 340
Footnote 405
F.5 #5
J.1 #1 (44)

> **- 033
Ok

> AT035
Ok (in PDF n3219)

> **- 038
Still a hanging paragraph in F.10 (not mentioned in comment). Fixing it would change Annex F subclause numbers for all the math functions. Suggest no change for C23.
Still a hanging paragraph in H.11 (not mentioned in comment).
Otherwise ok for Annexes F, G and H (others not checked).

> ** -046
Ok

> GB1 2- 048
Ok

> GB1 1- 049
Ok

> GB1 0- 050
Ok

> ** -068
Ok

> ** -069
The first change also replaced a semicolon with a period (preceding “Implementations conforming to Annex F have this behavior”). The semicolon made it clearer what “this behavior” refers too. Suggest restoring the semicolon.
Otherwise ok.

> GB3 3- 078
Ok

> ** -085
Ok
H.11.3.2.3, last line, is “See EXAMPLE in H.11.3.3.2.” I believe ISO style would be “See Example in …” or “See the example in …”. 

> GB5 3- 104
Ok

> GB5 4- 105
Ok
There’s a bad line break right after the top line of the 7.6.3 Synopsis box.
There’s a space at the beginning of the 4th line of 7.6.3 #2. 
 
In the end of 7.23.6.2, in Forward references, the 2nd line begins with a comma “,”.

> GB6 8- 121
Ok

> ** -128
Ok

> GB7 2- 134
Ok

> GB7 9- 142
OK

> GB7 6- 143
Ok
The breaks in the tables are awkward. I assume the entire tables won’t fit the page width. Adding a title for the second part of each table would be helpful, e.g. “Table H.1 (continued)”, which is what ISO suggests for tables that must be continued on another page. There’s a lot of space between the two parts of the tables.

> GB7 7- 144
Ok

> GB1 08- 146
> GB1 07- 147
> GB1 06- 148
> GB1 05- 149
> GB1 04- 150
> GB1 03- 151
> GB1 02- 152
> GB1 01- 153
> GB1 00- 154
> GB9 9- 155
> GB8 5- 164
> GB8 9- 165
> GB8 8- 166
> GB8 7- 167

Didn’t check 146 - 167 above, which refer to the Annexes and Annex J.

> GB9 2- 175
Ok

> GB9 1- 176
Ok regarding comment resolution, but ...
Don’t “TS 18661-n” need to be written as “ISO/IEC TS 18661-n”?
CFP and WG14 work referred to TS 18661-4a, but the “4a” doesn’t appear on any published document. The “a” doesn’t seem necessary because the bullet says “mathematical functions” which points to the feature that was integrated. Suggest omitting the “a”. Also, TS 18661-4 2nd edition is expected to publish at about the same time as C23, which means an undated reference to TS 18661-4 would be wrong (the new one doesn’t include the mathematical functions). Suggest using dated references to the TSes:
ISO/IEC TS 18661-1:2014
ISO/IEC TS 18661-2:2015
ISO/IEC TS 18661-3:2015
ISO/IEC TS 18661-4:2015

> **- 189
Ok

> 
> - Jim Thomas
> 
>> On Feb 22, 2024, at 2:48 PM, Rajan Bhakta <rbhakta at us.ibm.com> wrote:
>> 
>> Hello,
>>  
>> The draft post DIS comment resolution is linked to here: https://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n3219.pdf(Password: sc22wg14)
>> The final comment resolution document is here: https://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n3216.pdf
>> As a reminder, CFP has agreed to review the sections where any floating-point changes have happened.
>> I have asked for a diff based document as well, and if I get it, I will send it along as well.
>>  
>> Regards,
>> 
>> Rajan Bhakta
>> z/OS XL C/C++ Compiler Technical Architect
>> ISO C Standards Representative (Canada, USA), INCITS/C Chair
>> C/C++ Compiler Development
>> rbhakta at us.ibm.com <mailto:rbhakta at us.ibm.com>
>>  
>> IBM
>>  
>> _______________________________________________
>> Cfp-interest mailing list
>> Cfp-interest at oakapple.net <mailto:Cfp-interest at oakapple.net>
>> http://mailman.oakapple.net/mailman/listinfo/cfp-interest
> 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.oakapple.net/pipermail/cfp-interest/attachments/20240226/365469b7/attachment-0001.htm>