On Mon, 21 Mar 2022 16:05:56 +0000 Jonathan Wakely via Liaison wrote:
>
>The new denorm_min introduced by P1841 is supposed to make it unnecessary,
>but doesn't really do so, which is the subject of question 1 in P2551.
>Question 4 in P2551 is also related.

When will those questions be answered?
Will they be answered by a C++ numerics sub-group,
or the entire committee?

Based upon other emails here, C++ does not care if C
were to remove the *_HAS_SUBNORM macros.
Correct?

 

---
Fred J. Tydeman        Tydeman Consulting
tydeman_at_[hidden]      Testing, numerics, programming
+1 (702) 608-6093      Vice-chair of PL22.11 (ANSI "C")
Sample C99+FPCE tests: http://www.tybor.com
Savers sleep well, investors eat well, spenders work forever.