<span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif"> <b>Attendees</b>:
Rajan, Jim, Damian, Ian, David O., Fred, Mike, David H.</span><br><br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif"><b> New
agenda items:</b></span><br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">
None.</span><br><br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif"><b> Carry
over action items:</b></span><br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">
None.</span><br><br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif"><b> Last
meeting action items:</b></span><br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">
Jim: Create a proposal based on CFP 1709 updates to Annex B with the addition
of N and M parameter descriptions. - Done.</span><br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">
Jim: For cfp3x-annex-20200706.pdf, Annex X, new example (page 33), change
the magic number 40 (which needs to be verified) to be a macro and add
in a descriptive definition of that macro. - Done.</span><br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">
Jim: For cfp3x-annex-20200706.pdf, Annex X, strtoencdecd* function declarations
(page 35), make the pointers into arrays to allow giving a size for the
array. - Done.</span><br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">
Fred: Submit the paper in CFP 1703 to WG14 as a CFP paper. - Done.</span><br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">
Jim: Submit CFP 1653's changes (appropriately colorized or changed to highlight
the changes) to WG14. - Done.</span><br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">
Jim: Put CFP 1634 (with the correction: 'prototype is extended' -> 'prototype
is expanded') into TS3 as an annex. - Done.</span><br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">
Fred: Submit CFP 1704 to WG14 as a proposal from CFP. - Done.</span><br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">
Jim: Prepare a suggested change to C2X proposal based on CFP 1687 option
3. - Done.</span><br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">
Fred: Submit CFP 1702 to WG14 as a CFP paper. - Done.</span><br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">
David H: Come up with a sentence to add to footnote 295 (as per CFP 1697)
to point out the possible numerical differences in output. - Done.</span><br><br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif"><b> New
action items:</b></span><br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">
Jim: Submit the Annex B update (CFP 1743) to WG14.</span><br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">
Jim/Rajan: Create a slide deck for WG14 showing the substantial changes
for Annex X (TS part 3) based on CFP 1754.</span><br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">
Jim: Submit CFP 1737's paper to WG14.</span><br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">
Jim/David H: Submit a proposal based on CFP 1732 to WG14.</span><br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">
David H: Check that the IEEE references in CFP 1749's paper are in an acceptable
form.</span><br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">
Fred: Make CFP 1675 into a paper without the addition of 'triple' to the
index.</span><br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">
Jim: Create a WG14 proposal for the discussion in CFP 1736 (footnote 296).</span><br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">
Fred: Rewrite the paper based on CFP 1754 including changes to paragraph
4.</span><br><br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif"><b> Next
Meeting(s):</b></span><br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">
Wednesday, September 23rd, 2020, 11:00 EST, 8:00 PST, 4PM UTC</span><br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">
ISO Zoom teleconference</span><br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">
Please notify the group if this time slot does not work.</span><br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">
</span><br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif"><b> C++
liaison:</b></span><br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">
Nothing new.</span><br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif"> </span><br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif"><b> WG14
meeting (see CFP 1745):</b></span><br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">
intmax_t paper is N2548.</span><br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">
No discussion about Annex B.</span><br><br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif"><b> C2X
Integration:</b></span><br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">
Latest C2X draft: </span><a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n2478.pdf"><span style=" font-size:10pt;color:blue;font-family:sans-serif">http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n2478.pdf</span></a><br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">
Part 1</span><br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">
Part 2</span><br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">
Part 3</span><br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">
Part 4ab</span><br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">
Part 5abcd</span><br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">
IEEE 754-2019 support</span><br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">
- We have approval to move up to the next IEEE standard.</span><br><br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif"><b> Action
item details</b></span><br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">
Jim: Create a proposal based on CFP 1709 updates to Annex B with the addition
of N and M parameter descriptions. (See CFP 1743)</span><br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">
Fred: Does this version have the intmax_t or long long?</span><br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">
Jim: No intmax_t (see pown)</span><br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">
Still need to add in the complex, float, and stdlib header functions.</span><br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">
*AI*: Jim: Submit the Annex B update (CFP 1743) to WG14.</span><br><br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">
Jim: For cfp3x-annex-20200706.pdf, Annex X, new example (page 33), change
the magic number 40 (which needs to be verified) to be a macro and add
in a descriptive definition of that macro. (See CFP 1731)</span><br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">
Jim: For cfp3x-annex-20200706.pdf, Annex X, strtoencdecd* function declarations
(page 35), make the pointers into arrays to allow giving a size for the
array.</span><br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">
Jim: Put CFP 1634 (with the correction: 'prototype is extended' -> 'prototype
is expanded') into TS3 as an annex. (See CFP 1740)</span><br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">
Changelist in CFP 1754. We should present this to WG14. Some changes
are substantial like making _Float16 optional.</span><br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">
*AI*: Jim/Rajan: Create a slide deck for WG14 showing the substantial
changes for Annex X (TS part 3) based on CFP 1754.</span><br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">
</span><br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">
Fred: Submit the paper in CFP 1703 to WG14 as a CFP paper.</span><br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">
See N2547, Missing 'const' in decimal getpayload functions</span><br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">
The editor put in our changes wrong. This paper fixes it.</span><br><br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">
Jim: Submit CFP 1653's changes (appropriately colorized or changed to highlight
the changes) to WG14. (See CFP 1738)</span><br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">
N2552 should be talked about next WG14 meeting.</span><br><br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">
Fred: Submit CFP 1704 to WG14 as a proposal from CFP.</span><br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">
See N2546, Missing DEC_EVAL_METHOD</span><br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">
Should be seen next WG14 meeting.</span><br><br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">
Jim: Prepare a suggested change to C2X proposal based on CFP 1687 option
3. (See CFP 1737)</span><br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">
Fred: There have been discussions in the WG14 reflector on moving
the DFP functions to a separate header.</span><br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">
*AI*: Jim: Submit CFP 1737's paper to WG14.</span><br><br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">
Fred: Submit CFP 1702 to WG14 as a CFP paper.</span><br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">
See N2548, intmax_t and math functions</span><br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">
Should be seen next WG14 meeting.</span><br><br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">
David H: Come up with a sentence to add to footnote 295 (as per CFP 1697)
to point out the possible numerical differences in output. (See CFP 1732)</span><br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">
*AI*: Jim/David H: Submit a proposal based on CFP 1732 to WG14.</span><br><br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif"><b> Other
issues</b></span><br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">
Updating C2X to IEC 60559:2020 (See CFP 1749)</span><br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">
</span><a href="https://wiki.edg.com/pub/CFP/WebHome/C2x_proposal_-_update_to_IEC_60559_2020-20200816.pdf"><span style=" font-size:10pt;color:blue;font-family:sans-serif">https://wiki.edg.com/pub/CFP/WebHome/C2x_proposal_-_update_to_IEC_60559_2020-20200816.pdf</span></a><br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">
*AI*: David H: Check that the IEEE references in CFP 1749's paper
are in an acceptable form.</span><br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">
Jim: ISO and IEC seem to have different forms and words so
it would be good to check this.</span><br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">
Change 5: No clean break between recommended and required for us
in C, since the latest IEEE standard update had to add recommended vs required
due to their mandate.</span><br><br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">
Triple (1,0,0) (See CFP 1675)</span><br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">
Rajan: Prefer not to have the term 'triple' being added to the index
due to the overloading of the term.</span><br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">
*AI*: Fred: Make CFP 1675 into a paper without the addition of 'triple'
to the index.</span><br><br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">
Footnote about sufficient %a formatting precision (See CFP 1736)</span><br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">
*AI*: Jim: Create a proposal for the discussion in CFP 1736 (footnote
296).</span><br><br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">
Still need ideas on how to convert Word to good PDF with links.</span><br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">
Link to the site currently in use (from Microsoft) will be sent
out by Jim.</span><br><br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">
Underflow range errors (See CFP 1752)</span><br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">
Mike: Should not be an issue for Decimal as it's fully specified
in IEEE.</span><br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">
Fred: Exact sub-normal issues. The general Range error description
(not a range error for exact subnormal) whereas for underflow, it is listed
regardless of exactness. fdim can give underflow for exact while a normal
subtract can not. I can add words for exact sub-normal to be implementation
defined for underflow.</span><br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">
Jim: You may signal underflow/set errno or may not, not required
for sub-normals. It is implementation defined for both. It can be different
between different functions. It doesn't say in the C standard.</span><br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">
Jim: There are underflows that are not range errors given the definitions
in the C standard. Since C only has the default error handling, there are
implementations with extensions just like our TS for exception handling.
Those would need exact underflows to trigger that exception handling.</span><br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">
See CFP 1748 change to 7.12.1 #4 to expand #4 (range) to include
#6 (underflow).</span><br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">
Fred: For the fdim function, should we change it from 'shall occur'
to 'may occur' for exact subnormal results? It is effectively the case
due to the leeway for exception handling.</span><br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">
Jim: It is a range error and an underflow, but what the implementation
does about it is up in the air.</span><br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">
*AI*: Fred: I will rewrite the paper including changes to paragraph
4.</span><br><br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family: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</span><br><BR>