<font size=2 face="sans-serif"> <b>Attendees</b>: Rajan, Jim, David
H, Mike, Fred</font><br><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><b> New agenda items:</b></font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Discussion about upcoming
WG14 meeting.</font><br><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><b> Last meeting 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. - Done. Sent to WG14
on 2017/08/14.</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). - Done. Sent on 2017/08/16.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Jim: Check implications
for tgmath with regards to the augmented precision functions. - Done. Sent
on 2017/08/18.</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). - Done. Sent on 2017/08/21.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Jim: min-max: Add in a
statement about the preferred exponent. - Done. Sent on 2017/08/17.</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. - Done. Sent on 2017/08/17.</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. - Done
(rejected change). Sent on 2017/08/17.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> All: min-max: Consider
what to do for fmin/fmax functions in the C standard. - Done. In agenda.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Fred: Summarize what goes
wrong for FLT_EVAL_METHOD for the things Fred has tested. - Done. Sent
on 2017/07/14.</font><br><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><b> New action items:</b></font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Rajan: Check with David
Keaton to see if SD3 will be considered in the next WG14 meeting and if
so, can the floating point proposals (other than part 1 and 2) be postponed
unless we are prepared for them.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Jim: List the proposals
we have in flight with WG14 and what we need to do with them (if anything).</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Jim: Create a new DR against
part 3 for the non-arithmetic interchange formats to create format_DECIMAL_DIG
type macros.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Jim: Augmented add tgmath:
Change "invokes a real function" to "invokes a function
returning a real type".</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Jim: Augmented add: Create
a proposal for the new augmented precision functions including tgmath for
IEEE 2018 C binding.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Jim: Create a note to
say the existing fmin/fmax functions may not correspond to the new IEEE
754:2018 f{min/max}* functions in TS Part 1 as part of the 2018 binding
update.</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 September 26th,
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"> Some open issues
still:</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Payload
functions wanted by some people. Late proposal.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Another
set of augmented functions that round to nearest wanted by some people.
Not suitable for reproducible summation. Did not seem to be too much support.
For performance on some platforms.</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"> Nothing new to
create.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> *Rajan: Check with
David Keaton to see if SD3 will be considered in the next WG14 meeting
and if so, can the floating point proposals (other than part 1 and 2) be
postponed unless we are prepared for them.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> *Jim: List the
proposals we have in flight with WG14.</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"> DR501 (</font><a href="http://wiki.edg.com/pub/CFP/WebHome/DR_for_macros_for_non-arith_formats-20170816.pdf?twiki_redirect_cache=f9e2368fc8345a340634aff44271c2ab"><font size=2 color=blue face="sans-serif">http://wiki.edg.com/pub/CFP/WebHome/DR_for_macros_for_non-arith_formats-20170816.pdf?twiki_redirect_cache=f9e2368fc8345a340634aff44271c2ab</font></a><font size=2 face="sans-serif">):</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Add to the
existing set of DECIMAL_DIG macros to apply to the new formats.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> We thought
DECIMAL_DIG covered this, but it doesn't. With obsolescent of DECIMAL_DIG,
this is needed to cover that hole.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> *Create
a new DR against part 3 for the non-arithmetic interchange formats to create
format_DECIMAL_DIG type 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 add (</font><a href="http://wiki.edg.com/pub/CFP/WebHome/augop_spec-20170817.pdf"><font size=2 color=blue face="sans-serif">http://wiki.edg.com/pub/CFP/WebHome/augop_spec-20170817.pdf</font></a><font size=2 face="sans-serif">):</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Change looks
good.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Email on
2017/08/18: tgmath implications:</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> The
second addition seems to be worded weirdly since the wording for the function
returning a structure is talking about the return type instead of the type
of the function directly.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> *Change
"invokes a real function" to "invokes a function returning
a real type".</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> min/max (</font><a href="http://wiki.edg.com/pub/CFP/WebHome/min-max_spec-20170821.pdf"><font size=2 color=blue face="sans-serif">http://wiki.edg.com/pub/CFP/WebHome/min-max_spec-20170821.pdf</font></a><font size=2 face="sans-serif">):</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Change 1
(AI): Good.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Change 2
(missing text): Good.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Change 3
(forward references): Good.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Change 4
(preferred quantum exponents): Good.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Determine
-> Return: C Standard uses "determine" and doesn't use "return".
</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Result:
Keep it as "determine".</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> fmin/fmax
that are in the existing C standard: May need to remove this from part
1 via a DR.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> David
H: If no one has implemented f{min/max}_mag, maybe just get rid of them.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Can
obsolesce fmin/fmax and say they are equivalent to f{min/max}_num*. Part
1 right now makes them not equivalent. Need to change part 1 to make it
work.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Annex
F would need to change to handle SNaN's with these.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> The
new functions would have to be non-conditional features to replace the
existing.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Can
alternatively put in a note to the relationship to the new functions and
keep the existing ones.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> David:
Can also say the existing fmin/fmax don't necessarily correspond to any
of these new functions and should only affect SNaNs. Existing functions
generally work for most people since they don't have NaNs. No sense in
changing them.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> *Jim:
Write a note to say the existing fmin/fmax functions may not correspond
to the new IEEE 754:2018 f{min/max}* functions.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Nothing else expected
to add before ratification or balloting.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> </font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Seems a small enough
change to get another ~10 years conformance if we make these changes to
bind to IEEE-754:2018.</font><br><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Other:</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> FLT_EVAL_METHOD
(Willem's email):</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Basic issue
is problem with widening floating point constants even if explicitly suffixed.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Should we
bring attention to this possible pitfall? Or should we change wide evaluation?</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Seems to
have been implemented by at least some compilers as per Fred's 2017/07/14
email.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Fred's recent
response seems to indicate this case is covered.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Jim: The
new words in DR500 seem to not make this the case.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Perhaps
add a new statement to cover this or make it more clear?</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> floating vs floating-point:</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> We have
enough things for WG14 to look at without bringing this up unless someone
wants to tackle it.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Constant rounding
modes and tgmath (Email from Jim on 2017/08/29):</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Agree with
creating a DR against Part 1 to add in the _Roundwise aspect.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> </font><BR>