On Thu, Oct 7, 2021 at 11:39 AM Tom Honermann via Liaison
<liaison_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>
> Thank you for hosting the meeting yesterday, Aaron!

My pleasure, I'm glad it was a productive meeting, thank you for participating!

> With regard to this poll: Should the _Float* C names be available
> (through some means) in C++ and be used as the types behind the
> std::float* aliases?
>
> The SA vote rationale was "My reasons against were that similar but
> slightly incompatible types is not good for the same names. ...."
>
> Previous polls had consensus to align the usual arithmetic conversions
> between C and C++, but did not have consensus for applying the C++
> implicit conversion rules to C. With regard to the SA rationale above,
> is the "slightly incompatible types" concern directed at those
> differences in the implicit conversion rules? Or is the concern over
> other differences? If the latter, a list of notable differences would be
> useful.

I'll leave it to the person who made the comments to explain further,
but my personal interpretation of the comment was that there was
unease with exposing the C names in C++ unless the semantics were
identical and there are cases where the semantics are compatible for a
well-formed program in both languages but not identical across
languages. If I have this wrong, hopefully I'll be corrected.

> My understanding is that the intent of P1467R4, and as stated by the
> author yesterday, is that these types would have the same semantics in
> each language with the only exception being that, in some cases, a use
> may be ill-formed in one language and not the other (e.g., the
> differences in the implicit conversion rules).

This matches my understanding of the authors' intent with P1467.

~Aaron

>
> Tom.
>
> On 10/7/21 8:57 AM, Aaron Ballman via Liaison wrote:
> > The meeting minutes from the Oct 2021 special session on
> > floating-point types can be found at:
> > https://wiki.edg.com/bin/view/Wg21telecons2021/Teleconference2021-10-06.
> > The WG14 minutes will be posted to the document log in the near
> > future.
> >
> > Big thanks to Rajan Bhakta for taking minutes, and to all the
> > attendees for having such a productive special session!
> >
> > ~Aaron
> > _______________________________________________
> > Liaison mailing list
> > Liaison_at_[hidden]
> > Subscription: https://lists.isocpp.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/liaison
> > Link to this post: http://lists.isocpp.org/liaison/2021/10/0867.php
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Liaison mailing list
> Liaison_at_[hidden]
> Subscription: https://lists.isocpp.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/liaison
> Link to this post: http://lists.isocpp.org/liaison/2021/10/0868.php