<font size=2 face="sans-serif">2016/02/16, 12:00 EST:</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> <b>Attendees</b>: Rajan, Jim,
Mike, Ian, Marius, David</font><br><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> <b>New agenda items:</b></font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> None.</font><br><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> <b>Last meeting action items:</b></font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Ian: Talk to Lawrence
Crowl regarding proposing this IEEE-754: 2008 binding to C++ as well. -
In process.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> No response from
Lawrence to an email sent by Ian.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Second email sent
out.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Ian: Update and check
the items listed and flagged under Feature_List_Part_1. - Not done.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> All: Focused Review of
part 5 once the updated draft comes out. - Not done.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Missing one review.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Jim: Part 5: Page 2: Review
the change to see if clarification is needed regarding "after"
referring to time or source code. - Done.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Jim: Part 5: Page 18:
Line 45: Reword to make it clearer. - Done.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Jim: Part 5: Page 20,
21: Change the '#define n' to '#define NUMBER_OF_ELEMENTS'. - Done (different
macro name: LEN).</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Jim: Part 5: Page 21:
Change the "for (i=0;" to "for (int i=0;" - Done.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Jim: Get the changebar'd
and dated version of previous TS's on the wiki to review. - Done.</font><br><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> <b>New action items:</b></font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Jim: Part 5: p12: Line
14: Change to "supports reproducible results for decimal floating
types." or something similar.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Jim: Part 5: Page 12,
line 14; Page 13, line 3: Check the wording here to see if the standard
does this (enumerate values and then later says it can have other values).</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Jim: Part 5: Page 5 line
9: occurrences -> occurrence</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Jim: Part 5: Page 10:
Line 25: semantic type*s* -> semantic type. May occur in other places
in the document (Ex. Page 9, Line 22; Page 19, Line 23)</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Jim: Part 1: Page 51:
Line 3: Add a footnote to the 'l suffix' stating there are no functions
with the 'f' suffix.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Rajan: Send the DR template
to Jim for parts 1-4 issues to get them ready in time for the WG14 meeting.</font><br><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> <b>Next Meeting:</b></font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> *Monday March 15th, 2016,
12:00 EST, 9:00 PDT</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Same teleconference number.</font><br><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> <b>Discussion:</b></font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> WG14 mailing is March
14th, 2016. Meeting is April 11-15th, 2016 at BSI, London, England.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> </font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> IEEE 754 revision:</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Features being
discussed for a future revision, not this one.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> </font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Arith23:</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Some changes being
discussed for 754. Perhaps leave it for later?</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> </font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Other:</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> C Standard format
change should be done soon if not already done.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> </font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Part 5: Various emails,
documents (</font><a href="http://wiki.edg.com/twiki/pub/CFP/WebHome/cfp5-20160215.pdf"><font size=2 color=blue face="sans-serif">http://wiki.edg.com/twiki/pub/CFP/WebHome/cfp5-20160215.pdf</font></a><font size=2 face="sans-serif">):</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> All changes OK.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> *ToDo: Jim: Part
5: p12: Line 14: Change to "supports reproducible results for decimal
floating types." or something similar.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Jim: Perhaps
reword that part and later in that paragraph in general.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> </font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Ian's comments
(note sent today):</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Based off
an older draft. Ex. first change already handled.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Page 10:
Already handled.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Page 11-1:
Already handled. </font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Page 11-2:
Already handled.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Page 12-1:
*ToDo: Jim: Page 12, line 14; Page 13, line 3: Check the wording here to
see if the standard does this (enumerate values and then later says it
can have other values).</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Page 12-2:
*ToDo: Jim: Page 5 line 9: occurrences -> occurrence</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Page 13-2:
Seems clear with context (the sentence before).</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Page 13-4:
Already handled.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Page 13-5:
Already handled.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Page 18:
*ToDo: Jim: Page 10: Line 25: semantic type*s* -> semantic type. May
occur in other places in the document (Ex. Page 9, Line 22; Page 19, Line
23)</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> </font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> David's review
to go still.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> </font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> We did not allow
unspecified sub-exceptions to occur. The 754 committee said it is not allowed.
Matches our current draft and 754 is adding this as well.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> </font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Part 1 (cfp1-20160202.pdf):</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Fred's Part 1 questions
(Jim's response sent on 2016/01/13):</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Point 1:
Should we add a footnote saying there are no functions with the 'f' suffix?</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> *ToDo:
Jim: Part 1: Page 51: Line 3: Add a footnote to the 'l suffix' stating
there are no functions with the 'f' suffix.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Point 2:
No harm. Other implementations could have other types so the macros could
be useful (Ex. HP's w/q suffixes).</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> </font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Page 18, line 19:
OK.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Page 38, line 24:
OK.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Page 40, line 30:
OK.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Page 48, line 24:
OK.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> </font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Note that this
part was reformatted by ISO (other parts were not).</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Blaine suggested
we create DR's for these changes. Ex. All the simple typo's in one, adding
more text should be separate DR's.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> *ToDo: Rajan: Send
the DR template to Jim for these issues to get it ready in time for the
WG14 meeting.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> </font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Part 2 (cfp2-20160202):</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Title page: ISO
replaces the title page so no issue here, but we will fix it for ourselves.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Page viii: OK.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Page 34: format
-> type: OK.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Page 50: May not
be an editorial change (clarification).</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> </font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Part 3 (cfp3-20160202):</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Title page: ISO
replaces the title page so no issue here, but we will fix it for ourselves.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Page 32: Typo,
but not an editorial change. Should be it's own DR even though it is an
obvious error.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Page 39: OK.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> </font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Part 4 (cfp4-20160202):</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Title page: ISO
replaces the title page so no issue here, but we will fix it for ourselves.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> </font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Will post updated versions
of these on the wiki.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> </font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> What should be proposed for the
C standard:</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Should we propose most
of part 1?</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Ian: Part 3 is useful
so we should push for that as well.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Intel and GCC have
__float128 (possibly not by the compiler for Intel). AMD and GCC have 16-bit
float (half precision). Pushes the need for standardization.</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><BR>