<font size=2 face="sans-serif"> <b>Attendees</b>: Rajan, Jim, Ian,
Fred, Mike, David H, Clark, </font><br><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><b> New agenda items:</b></font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> DR16 (Clark)</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Fred email DECIMAL_DIG</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Jim's email about TS update</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Fred's email regarding
roundToEven</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> </font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Ian: Retiring at end of
May this year</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Ian: POWER9 will have
IEEE quad precision</font><br><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><b> Last meeting action items:</b></font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Ian: See if there is an
incompatibility between C and C++ for constants being evaluated to a wider
format (Ex. FLT_EVAL_METHOD affects constants in C++, and wider return
values) - Keep open (Hubert: Not defined and left up to C)</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Jim: tgmath_for_narrowing_functions
(DR13, part 3): Need to bring in functions that cover three arguments.
- Done.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Jim: tgmath_for_narrowing_functions
(DR13, part 3): Rewording for the f32mul example. - Done.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Jim: Create a new paper
along the lines of tgmath_for_narrowing_functions proposing a new TC for
CFP DR13. - Done.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Jim: Write a DR addressing
WG14 reflector message 14885 using the email sent by Jim on 2017/11/13.
- Done.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Fred: Look through the
new functions and see what is missing in Annex F. - Not done.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Fred: Follow up with inconsistencies
in Infinities references in function descriptions in our TS via email.
- Done.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Fred: Look into 754:2018
4.3.1 (roundTiesToEven) applies to us for string conversion (printf for
example). - Done.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Jim: Update the binding
table in parts 1 and 2 to handle the new IEEE-754:2018 functions when published.
- Keep open.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> David H: Look into the
consistency with our TS and IEEE-754:2018 for 5.3.2, 9.2, 9.2.1, 9.2.2
and 9.4. - Done.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Jim: Update activities
list (</font><a href="http://wiki.edg.com/pub/CFP/WebHome/in_flight-20171004.pdf"><font size=2 color=blue face="sans-serif">http://wiki.edg.com/pub/CFP/WebHome/in_flight-20171004.pdf</font></a><font size=2 face="sans-serif">)
with new status (LaTeX integration) and items (consistency with 754:2018
draft, special cases in Annex F). - Done.</font><br><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><b> New action items:</b></font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> exp10m1: Look at exp10m1
difference between the TS and 754 in more detail.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> pow: Add a note to F10.4.4
pow to say it is the same as IEEE-754.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> reduc_sumprod: "computed
sum" -> "computed dot product" for clarity.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Jim: Add preferred exponents
functions list to part 4.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Jim: Get a N# and post
the new TC for DR13 to WG14.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Jim: Create a new DR for
arguments for comparison macros (</font><a href=http://wiki.edg.com/pub/CFP/WebHome/DR_for_incommensurate_arguments_for_comparison_macros.pdf><font size=2 color=blue face="sans-serif">http://wiki.edg.com/pub/CFP/WebHome/DR_for_incommensurate_arguments_for_comparison_macros.pdf</font></a><font size=2 face="sans-serif">)</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Fred: Draft a note for
roundTiesToEven for the exceptional case of two odd values.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Jim: Draft a proposal
for CR_DECIMAL_DIG corrections (with the removal of DECIMAL_DIG) and updating
the footnote (F.5).</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Jim: DR15: Make the Suggested
TC the Proposed TC.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Jim: Re-update the activities
list from results from today.</font><br><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><b> Issues:</b></font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Does CR_DECIMAL_DIG have
the same issues as DECIMAL_DIG?</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Why does the cbrt macro
(DR16) have the parameters inside the generic selection?</font><br><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><b> Next Meetings:</b></font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> February 20th, 2018, 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"> Adding payload
functions found a lot of issues. Being resolved.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> The existing 2008
standard expires at the end of 2018. Looking into extending the lifetime
until the new one can take over.</font><br><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> C++ liaison:</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Nothing.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> </font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> C DR16:</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Clark: Concerns:
A lot of effort in improving an example. Also cascading error.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Jim: The change
is not to the example, it is a TS description of what needs to be changed
to support tgmath with this if it followed what the example did.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Clark: If the compiler
knows that a math library function is being called, the implementation
should honor the static rounding mode.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Jim: It's
a part of the semantics of the macro. If you are using the macro (like
the tgmath.h cbrt macro), this describes what you would expect.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Clark: Why
are you trying to describe the implementation?</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Jim: Since
the C standard shows how it can be implemented for tgmath. This is a note
to show what needs to be done to make it work. As it is it would not work
the way it is (i.e. would not support static rounding modes).</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Clark: History:
If a library function was called indirectly it is not required to support
static rounding modes. This was changed to the macro expansion text which
is where you went off the rails.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Jim: If
macro expansion has been disabled, the modes are not supported.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Jim: We do say
explicitly that if you do suppress macro expansion you will not get static
rounding.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Clark: The original
example in the standard was carefully crafted to not have the argument
list being listed multiple times.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Jim: Don't
know why that was done. May have been a reason. We can put that aside.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Clark: Was
the parameter list moved inside to allow further macro expansion?</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Jim:
We can look into why that was done.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Clark: Moving the
argument list outside the selection and knowing you are doing what you
are doing on purpose is a step in the right direction. Just keep me in
the loop (send an email) about things that touch generic selection.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> If the original
motivation was to handle indirect calls, allowing a way to force not using
static rounding modes is not good and this is the wrong way to go.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> </font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Email Issues:</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Consistency between
CFP TS and IEEE-754:2008 (David's email on 2018/01/08):</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> tanpi: Likely
implementations present now.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> David:
IEEE didn't add it due to strange formats (not the zero and inf).</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> atan2pi:
Jim: Domain errors is historical. Should be consistent otherwise.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> exp10m1:
David: Seems to be a mistake in the TS.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Jim:
The difference in the value that is returned is too small to affect the
result. i.e You can't get a small and inexact result.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> *Look
at exp10m1 issues in more detail.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Fred:
Currently says range error if finite x is too large, but it should be positive
finite x.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">
Jim: It is already a defect right? Can raise it via email if needed.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> pow: David:
We should translate the IEEE spec into the C spec as close as possible
to make it easier to compare.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Jim:
But comparisons between C versions would then change.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> David:
We could have a statement saying it is the same as 754, just in a different
order.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> *Add
a note to F10.4.4 pow to say it is the same as IEEE-754.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> powr: *Look
into the difference between powr in the TS vs 754 in more detail.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Fred:
We do list it as an error in part 4.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Remove
the action item.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> reduc_sumprod:
Jim: I don't think we use the term dot product anywhere.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> David:
We do. In 7.12.13b4.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> *reduc_sumprod:
"computed sum" -> "computed dot product" for clarity.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Preferred
exponents: Missing entries for rsqrt, compound, rootn, pown, powr for preferred
quantum exponents.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> David:
These are new functions (not in C) so they should not be in Part 2, but
should be in Part 4.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> *Jim:
We just missed them in part 4 I believe.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> </font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> tgmath for narrowing
functions (2017/11/18): </font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Jim: Can
remove some extra wording ("determined", "real type")
since it is already defined and determined.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> New TC for
DR13 (2018/01/02): Has all the changes.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> *AI: Jim:
Get a document number and send this to WG14.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> </font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> DR addressing arguments
for comparison macros (2018/01/02):</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Create a
new DR for this.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> </font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Inconsistencies
in specification of infinities (2018/01/08 email titled "fadd, fsub
and domain errors"):</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Fred: Not
too hard make the changes.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Listing
functions that list infinities and NaNs. There are quite a few that mention
them. It is not just in Annex F.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> nextafter:
Jim: The infinite there is helpful since not representable may be confusing.
Infinite is there since it is helpful.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> </font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> The
last part (754 vs 18661) is for another action item. Will follow up via
email.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Jim: There
is no attempt to cover all inf and nan cases.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Fred: If
we keep the existing mentioning of inf and nan, we should add fadd and
fsub or mention that domain errors occur for inf arguments with opposite
sign for the TS.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Jim: If
an implementation has unsigned inf, is a domain error allowed?</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Fred:
For fsub, yes, but not for fadd.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> </font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Fred to
send an email if this proposal is wanted.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> </font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> roundTiesToEven
(2018/01/08, 09):</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Fred: 754
requires taking the larger magnitude one if both are odd.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Our
doc follows printf for rounding.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> We
should add this one example to show the unusual case.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Jim:
Is a note OK?</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Fred:
Fine.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> </font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> DECIMAL_DIG (2017/11/19):</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Fred: Without
DECIMAL_DIG, the other definitions need something (CR_DECIMAL_DIG).</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Jim:
We can have the formula for DECIMAL_DIG + 3 to replace DECIMAL_DIG.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">
It should support extended, interchange and non-arithmetic.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">
In part 1, we talk about supported formats, so CR_DECIMAL_DIG should be
fine (vs the issue with DECIMAL_DIG). In part 3 the other formats should
have it working automatically.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> *Issue:
Does CR_DECIMAL_DIG have the same issues as DECIMAL_DIG.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> *Jim:
Write up a proposal on changes based on this email.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> This
should not be a part of DR501 since it is for Part 1, not the C standard.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> </font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> DR15 (2018/01/06):</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Will make
the change as editorial but keep the suggested TC as the proposed TC.</font><br><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Binding for IEEE 754-2018:</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Payload: We will
have to change.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> The rest seem fine
(will discuss augmented arithmetic after with Mike and David present).</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> </font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> C2X integration:</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Jim: Any guidelines
for using git?</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Rajan: Jens
said anyone can create branches. We should get the N document that is submitted
for FDIS.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Some
committee members prefer the full document, not just the diff list.</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">
</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Activities:</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Defer to next meeting.</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"> None.</font><BR>