<font size=2 face="sans-serif"> <b>Attendees:</b> Rajan, David H.
Fred, Jim, David C., Ian</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"> Jim: Reword </font><a href="http://wiki.edg.com/pub/CFP/WebHome/augop_spec-20170422.pdf"><font size=2 color=blue face="sans-serif">http://wiki.edg.com/pub/CFP/WebHome/augop_spec-20170422.pdf</font></a><font size=2 face="sans-serif">to have the additions done in Annex F only. - Done</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Jim: Work </font><a href="http://wiki.edg.com/pub/CFP/WebHome/min-max_names.pdf"><font size=2 color=blue face="sans-serif">http://wiki.edg.com/pub/CFP/WebHome/min-max_names.pdf</font></a><font size=2 face="sans-serif">into a specification for the main body of the standard. Also add a footnote
saying for implementations without NaN's the functions have the same results.
- Done</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> All: Look into any other
teleconferencing facility (Ex. Cisco Webex, Skype, etc.). - Not done</font><br><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><b> New action items:</b></font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Jim: Send the note (2017/06/28)
drafted by Jim to WG14 for DR9 %a precision concerns.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Jim: Re DR501: Make a
new proposal for Part 3 for new macros (format-specific DECIMAL_DIG like
macros)</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Jim: Check implications
for tgmath with regards to the augmented precision functions.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Jim: Augmented precision:
Add in text to state that the functions force a particular rounding (ignoring
static or dynamic rounding modes and implementation supported rounding
modes).</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Jim: min-max: Add in a
statement about the preferred exponent.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Jim: min-max: Add a reference
to the corresponding Annex F section for NaN treatment in the fmaximum/fminimum/fmaximum_mag/fminimum_mag
functions.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Jim: min-max: {fmaximum/fminimum/fmaximum_mag/fminimum_mag}_num
functions: They determine the number -> they return the number</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> All: min-max: Consider
what to do for fmin/fmax functions in the C standard.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Fred: Summarize what goes
wrong for FLT_EVAL_METHOD for the things Fred has tested.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> </font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><b> Next Meetings:</b></font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Tuesday August 29th, 2017,
12:00 EDT, 9:00 PST</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"> IEEE 754 revision:</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Another month or
two until ballot likely.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Expecting 2018
publish</font><br><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> C++ liaison:</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> No update.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> </font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> C2x proposals:</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Part 5d (alternate
exception handling):</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Leave it
as is unless there is a proposal, some direction or implementation experience.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> </font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> DRs:</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> DR9 (tgmath, arith
conversions): Latest proposal from us is there. Looks good.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> DR11 (a-style formatting):
Issue with the precision specification (binary vs decimal)</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Recommend
it not be changed as per last meeting discussion.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> *Send the
note (2017/06/28) drafted by Jim to WG14.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> DR501 (C, DECIMAL_DIG):
</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Let DECIMAL_DIG
be obsolesced.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> *Make a
new proposal for Part 3 for new macros (format-specific DECIMAL_DIG like
macros)</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> </font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Binding for IEEE 754-2018:</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Augmented precision
(</font><a href="http://wiki.edg.com/pub/CFP/WebHome/augop_spec-20170619.pdf"><font size=2 color=blue face="sans-serif">http://wiki.edg.com/pub/CFP/WebHome/augop_spec-20170619.pdf</font></a><font size=2 face="sans-serif">):
</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> h, t names
OK? Yes.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Fred: Any
mention for tgmath here? </font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Jim:No,
not going to try to add these to tgmath.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> David
H: Usually these functions are used with the widest hardware precision
present. Type generic wouldn't add much here.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Fred:
We should add words to say why these are not in tgmath.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> *Check
implications for tgmath with regards to the augmented precision functions</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Note that
round to nearest, tie away from zero. This means it is independent of the
current rounding mode (static and dynamic), and the implementation does
not necessarily have to have support for that rounding mode, though the
functions must have the results as if it is there.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Can add
these notes to F.10.13.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> min/max operations
(</font><a href="http://wiki.edg.com/pub/CFP/WebHome/min-max_spec-20170614.pdf"><font size=2 color=blue face="sans-serif">http://wiki.edg.com/pub/CFP/WebHome/min-max_spec-20170614.pdf</font></a><font size=2 face="sans-serif">):
</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> In the rationale
(paragraph 1), state it would be problematic rather than unusable.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Even though
these are optional, they are intended to be mandatory the next revision.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Fred: Does
the quantum matter for the zeros?</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Jim:
Missing a statement about the preferred exponent here.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Seems
to be not specified in IEEE 754 so far. To be discussed in the IEEE 754
meeting.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> For the
max/min functions it mentions differing from the max/min_num functions
due to NaNs, but doesn't say what it does for NaNs.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> *Add a reference
to the corresponding Annex F section for this in the fmaximum/fminimum/fmaximum_mag/fminimum_mag
functions</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> *{fmaximum/fminimum/fmaximum_mag/fminimum_mag}_num
functions: They determine the number -> they return the number</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Should fmin/fmax
be obsolesced? Been out for a while. Can propose that as well.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> The
specification (7.12.12.2/3) could also be loosened for NaNs?</font><br><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Other:</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> FLT_EVAL_METHOD
(Willem Wakker):</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Likely most
compilers do the constant evaluation wrong and should have FLT_EVAL_METHOD
-1, though it may be correct for operations.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> The TS will
allow you to request FLT_EVAL_METHOD 0.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> *Fred: Summarize
what goes wrong for FLT_EVAL_METHOD for the things Fred has tested.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> </font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> floating vs floating-point:</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Inconsistent
usage throughout the C standard. Can maybe say floating-point is for things
that follow the floating point model.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> </font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Constant rounding
modes and tgmath (Joseph Myers) - Email from Jim on 2017/07/07:</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Deals with
the example for this (cube root function).</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Change proposed
in the email seems good.</font><br><BR>