<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=us-ascii"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; line-break: after-white-space;" class="">Please also let me know if you could attend on Tuesday, October 5, same time.<div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">- Jim Thomas<br class=""><div><br class=""><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class="">On Sep 20, 2021, at 5:45 PM, Jim Thomas <<a href="mailto:jaswthomas@sbcglobal.net" class="">jaswthomas@sbcglobal.net</a>> wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><div class=""><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=us-ascii" class=""><div style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; line-break: after-white-space;" class=""><div class="">The C/C++ liaison group has been discussing at some length possible conflicts (see below) with the WG21 proposal for extension floating-point types and the new C23 annex for TS-3. Aaron Ballman, as SC22 chair, suggested a joint 1-hour meeting with CFP and interested WG21 members as a forum to deal with the concerns. After email discussion, Aaron, Rajan, and I decided to propose <b class="">Wednesday, October 6, at 8 AM PDT / 11 AM EDT / 3 PM UTC. Would you be able to attend a zoom meeting at that time? Please respond if possible by end of Tuesday, September 21.</b></div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">- Jim Thomas<br class=""><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Aaron wrote:</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><blockquote type="cite" class="">Here's the summary of topics I've pulled together from the various<br class="">reflector discussions:<br class=""><br class="">* Currently, the new types are exclusively available in the<br class="">_Reserved_name spelling (like "_Bool" was in C99), there is no set of<br class="">"pretty" macros (like "bool" was in <stdbool.h>) -- that means that if<br class="">C++ decides to introduce new pretty names like (std::)float16_t, we<br class="">have no immediately interoperable name (like "float16_t") that would<br class="">be valid C, since there is no macro "#define float16_t _Float_16",<br class="">say.<br class=""><br class="">* The proposed rules for C and C++ have different arithmetic conversion rules:<br class=""> float + _Float32 -> _Float32<br class=""> float + std::float32 -> float<br class=""><br class="">* The above point is observable in that you get UB when passing a<br class="">_Float32 vs a float as a vararg parameter due to the promotion rules<br class="">(float promotes to double, _Float32 does not).<br class=""></blockquote><br class=""><blockquote type="cite" class="">It's possible I've missed some points (there are a few threads going<br class="">with a lot of messages on each of them), but Fred Tydeman and Joseph<br class="">Myers have both weighed in on the thread, which is helpful! ...</blockquote></div></div></div></div></blockquote></div><br class=""></div></body></html>