<html><body>
<p><font size="2" face="sans-serif"><b>Attendees</b></font><font size="2" face="sans-serif"><b>:</b></font><font size="2" face="sans-serif"> Jim, Rajan, Mike, Fred, David, Ian</font><br>
<br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"><b>Old action items:</b></font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"> Jim: Look into using the Wiki as a backup for the documents in Word format. - Most current version has been put up. Keep this item open. - Continuing to be done</font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"> Jim: Part 2: Will go with _Decimal32/64/128 ordering and Jim will follow up with Joseph to see if he agrees. - Done</font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"> Jim: Part 2: Draft wording changes (based on Josephs email) regarding decimal vs generic radix 10 static rounding mode and we will review. - Done</font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"> All: Part 2: A document will have to be delivered before the December meeting so please watch emails and respond quickly. - Done</font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"> *Jim: Part 1/2/3/4: Add a note regarding the a/b/c/... clause suffix meaning and reasoning for parts 2 on (since 1 is in ballot). Also check to see if this can be added in Part 1 as well. - Not done</font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"> Jim: Part 3: Try to use the math symbols for ceiling and floor instead of the words ceiling and floor. - Done</font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"> Jim: Part 4: Look for opportunities for shortening function lists by removing suffixes. - Not done</font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"> Jim: Part 4: Send a note to the IEEE-754 group to get review of the draft from them. - Not done</font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"> Jim: Part 4: Remove the bold N in 5.3 function lists. - Done</font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"> Jim: Part 4: Add in issue: We don't require conformance to part 3, and don't say _FloatNx (for example) must follow Part 3 so the functions are defined but are not the same as intended if an implemenatation has _FloatNx types but not Part 3 based. - Done/Closed</font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"> Jim: Part 4: Pi functions: Drop the second "half-revolutions" - Done</font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"> Jim: Part 4: atan2pi: Flag the description wording as an issue. - Done</font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"> Jim: Part 4: atan2pi: Add in atan2pi has a domain error for both arguments being zero. - Done</font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"> Jim: Part 4: log21p: Add in issue: It could be read as log 21 p instead of log2 1p. - Done</font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"> Jim: Part 4: rsqrt: Need to add a domain error. - Done</font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"> Jim: Part 4: compoundn: Add an issue: Why is it not an long long int? - Done</font><br>
<br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"><b>Next Meeting:</b></font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"> January 7th, 2014, 12:00 EST, 9:00 PDT - Tuesday</font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"> Same teleconference number.</font><br>
<br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"><b>New action items:</b></font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"> Jim: Backup the documents in Word format. - Most current version has been put up. Keep this item open.</font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"> Current files: <a href="http://wiki.edg.com/twiki/pub/CFP/WebHome/cfp1.docx">http://wiki.edg.com/twiki/pub/CFP/WebHome/cfp1.docx</a></font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"> Current files: <a href="http://wiki.edg.com/twiki/pub/CFP/WebHome/cfp2.docx">http://wiki.edg.com/twiki/pub/CFP/WebHome/cfp2.docx</a></font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"> Current files: <a href="http://wiki.edg.com/twiki/pub/CFP/WebHome/cfp3.docx">http://wiki.edg.com/twiki/pub/CFP/WebHome/cfp3.docx</a></font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"> Current files: <a href="http://wiki.edg.com/twiki/pub/CFP/WebHome/cfp4.docx">http://wiki.edg.com/twiki/pub/CFP/WebHome/cfp4.docx</a></font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"> Note: Should also keep versions that are equivalent to PDF's.</font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"> Jim: Part 3: Bring up the clause letter numbering issue at the WG14 meeting and get direction on where to put it (since the C Standard editor is normally there).</font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"> Jim: Part 3: Get a WG14 document number and post it and ask for review from the 754 group as well.</font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"> Jim: Part 4: Page 5: Fred's note first comment (2013/12/12 note) - Jim to fix.</font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"> Jim: Part 4: Page 6: Fred's note second comment (2013/12/12) - Add to the description of atan2pi that atan2pi is atan2/pi.</font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"> Jim: Part 4: Page 10: Leave issue 2 but add in other log*p* naming suggestions made as part of the issue.</font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"> Jim: Part 4: Page 11: See if the issue 3 comment can fit in the binding clause.</font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"> Jim: Part 4: Page 13: Add in the comment from 754 describing where this powr function comes from.</font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"> Jim: Part 4: Page 15: Lines 14, 20 boundaries should be -1 not 0. Also the x should be lower case (including line 26).</font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"> Jim: Part 4: Page 16: Make the change to the sum range to follow C indexes. Applies to later functions using similar notation (up to page 19).</font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"> Jim: Part 4: Page 18: Line 17: sumabs -> sumprod.</font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"> Fred: Part 4: Page 18: sumprod: See if the arrays have to be non-overlapping and to see if we need to add restrict here.</font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"> Jim: Part 4: Page 21: Line 10: Change (sum) -> (each of which is a sum)</font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"> David: Part 4: Page 21: Email other suggestions to the group for action item above.</font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"> Jim: Part 4: Add in the 754 operation to C function name binding table as in previous parts into this part.</font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"> Jim: Part 4: Get a WG14 document number and post it and ask for review from the 754 group as well.</font><br>
<br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"><b>Discussion:</b></font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"> Part 1: Out for ISO DTS ballot. Ballot ends March 5th, 2014.</font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"> If no significant comments, no more ballots needed.</font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"> Editorial changes can be made, including removing table numbers to match the C standard.</font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"> </font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"> Part 2: Out for first ISO ballot (PDTS). Ballot ends March 10th, 2014.</font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"> WG14 meeting is April 7th to 11th so we should have the recommended responses at least two weeks before that.</font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"> Fred: Suffixes issue will potentially affect this part as well as part 3.</font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"> - Will be discussed in Part 3.</font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"> </font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"> Part 3:</font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"> Evaluation methods for Part 3 types – see Nov 30 email</font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"> Agreed to the proposal given in the email.</font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"> Similar change for decimal evaluation.</font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"> Floating-suffixes for decimal – see emails Dec 2,3</font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"> Converging on options 2 or 3. i.e. Full list of suffixes.</font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"> Slight leaning towards duplicate. Will leave it as an issue, and have the text as duplicate.</font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"> Clause suffix/paragraph suffix letter action item from last meeting:</font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"> ISO template has it at the start of the document already. If we try to do it it would renumber following sections.</font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"> Rajan: Can we put it in under a paragraph without a number/renumbering?</font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"> Jim: May not meet ISO review. It is under the symbols and abbreviated terms section in the template (Clause 5).</font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"> The template does say it can be combined with Terms and definitions (Clause 4).</font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"> *AI* Jim: We could bring it up at the WG14 meeting and get direction on where to put it (since the C Standard editor is normally there).</font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"> Fred's email on 2013/12/12:</font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"> Does not seem to be confusing for others. No change.</font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"> *AI* We can get a WG14 document number and post it and ask for review from the 754 group as well.</font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"> </font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"> Part 4:</font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"> Changes:</font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"> pg 5: OK with change</font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"> *AI* Fred's note first comment (2013/12/12 note) - Jim to fix.</font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"> pg 6: Issue 1:</font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"> *AI* Fred's note second comment (2013/12/12) - Jim: Add to the description of atan2pi that atan2pi is atan2/pi.</font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"> pg 10: Issue 2:</font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"> David: Suggestion: How about log1p10 and log1p2?</font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"> Jim: Inconsistent with exp (ex. exp2m1, exp10m1).</font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"> 754 has log2p1 and logp1 (whereas C has log1p).</font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"> David: Can also live with the inconsistency and leave it log2p1 and log10p1.</font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"> *AI* Jim: Leave issue 2 but add in other suggestions made as part of the issue.</font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"> pg 11: OK with first change</font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"> Issue 3: C has min 32 bits for long int.</font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"> David: Sounds like it is large enough for any conceivable use.</font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"> Fred: The description in the issue sounds good for the rationale.</font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"> We can add this comment as part of the binding rather than as part of the rationale.</font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"> *AI* Jim: See if the issue 3 comment can fit in the binding clause.</font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"> pg 13: Difference to pow is domain error if x is less than zero.</font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"> Fred's note third comment (2013/12/12)</font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"> r stands for real (vs complex)</font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"> *AI* Jim: Add in the comment from 754 describing where this powr function comes from.</font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"> David: Keeping the special cases in the same order as 754 can reduce confusion.</font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"> Fred: Line 14: Should it read "non-negative x raised to the power of y"?</font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"> Jim: Confuses the case for -0.</font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"> Jim: If anyone finds a better order please propose it.</font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"> Fred: Some cases for qNaN's that are not here.</font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"> David: We don't list NaN arguments just NaN results in general.</font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"> Fred: powr(x, qNaN) gives qNaN for x > 0 is one case 754 lists.</font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"> Jim: Normal case of NaN's flowing through so we should not have to state it.</font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"> Fred: Some special cases in pow that list NaNs so we should do it for powr.</font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"> Jim: We do that. The ones that are mentioned are the ones that go against the normal rules.</font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"> pg 15:</font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"> Line 14/20: The boundaries should be -1 not 0. Also the x should be lower case (including line 26).</font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"> *AI* Jim to change pg 15, line 14, 20 boundaries should be -1 not 0. Also the x should be lower case (including line 26).</font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"> pg 16: </font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"> Rajan: Seems to mix C and math symbols so it should be sum range of 0 to n-1.</font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"> *AI* Jim: Make the change to the sum range to follow C indexes. Applies to later functions using similar notation (up to page 19).</font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"> pg 18:</font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"> Fred: Can the arrays overlap? Since it is a read it shouldn't matter.</font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"> Line 17: Typo: sumabs -> sumprod</font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"> *AI* Jim: Fix typo on page 18, line 17: sumabs -> sumprod.</font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"> Fred: You can put restrict in [] if needed.</font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"> *AI* Fred: See if the arrays have to be non-overlapping and to see if we need to add restrict here.</font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"> pg 19:</font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"> Sum ranges needs to change here as well.</font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"> Fred: Restrict needs to be considered here as well.</font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"> pg 21:</font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"> Fred: The (sum) makes no sense to me. Applies to other parts here as well.</font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"> Jim: The factors are sums. There is no running product (that is the implementation).</font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"> David: Perhaps say "each of which is a sum"?</font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"> *AI* Jim: Part 4: Page 21 line 10: Change (sum) -> (each of which is a sum)</font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"> *AI* David: Email other suggestions to the group.</font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"> </font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"> Question: Has anyone implemented these functions? Any prospects of someone working on them? Marius has mentioned that Intel has implemented all of these.</font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"> Lots of edge cases with exceptions and implementing the right exceptions (or none) in the right locations.</font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"> Ex. Any NaN means no signals, but if you had -Inf, Inf then you have to have an exception, so a later NaN would result in removing that previously generated exception!</font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"> </font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"> *AI* Jim: Add in the 754 operation to C function name binding table as in previous parts into this part.</font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"> *AI* Jim: Get a WG14 document number and post it and ask for review from the 754 group as well.</font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"> </font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"> We can add another document that puts in all the parts into C11 as a separate document.</font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"> Fred: Good idea, but hard to do Word+troff merge.</font><br>
<br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif">Regards,<br>
<br>
Rajan Bhakta<br>
z/OS XL C/C++ Compiler Technical Architect<br>
ISO C Standards Representative for Canada<br>
C Compiler Development<br>
Contact: rbhakta@us.ibm.com, Rajan Bhakta/Houston/IBM</font></body></html>