Re: C11/POSIX-2024 Questions

Thanks everyone. I guess the broader question with multiple
standards being released close to each other, is do we need
a master plan? Or just fix things as they are spotted.

It seems there are a number of things to address this time.

--joel

On Fri, Jun 28, 2024 at 4:33 PM <[email protected]> wrote:

> On 2024-06-28 08:37, Joel Sherrill wrote:
> > Hi
> >
> > I am finishing up reviewing the additions from POSIX Issue 8 which was
> released
> > recently. I noticed a few things and have questions on the right
> approach.
> >
> > + I only have the final draft for POSIX-2024. It says "_POSIX_VERSION to
> the value
> > 20yymmL." It isn't on the web yet for the HTML version. Anyone know the
> value
> > this has in the final version?
>
> The Austin Group minutes say in:
>
>
> https://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg12711.html
>
> "The IEEE and The Open Group pdf edition was published on Friday June
> 14th."
>
> so I would expect POSIX-1.2004/IEEE Std. 1003-1(2024) to have 202406L date.
>
> Another email states it could take another month for the HTML ~July 21.
>
> > + sys/features.h appears to need this new POSIX version added at least
> to the
> > comment block. I don't think it necessarily changes any logic below that.
>
> The latest draft normative references include ISO/IEC 10646:2020 (6th
> edition)
> so Unicode should be at least 13 dated 2020-03-06 and __STDC_ISO_10646__
> at
> least 202003L.
> This was amended by ISO/IEC 10646:2020/Amd1:2023 2023-07-17 so Unicode
> could be
> up to 15.0 dated 2022-09-09 with __STDC_ISO_10646__ 202209L.
> There were no amendments for Unicode 14 2021-09-10 or 15.1 2023-08-28.
> Future considerations expect Unicode 16 in Amendment 2:2025.
>
> ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC2 WG2 is no longer at http://std.dkuug.dk/jtc1/sc2/wg2
> (NXDOMAIN) so old working documents are no longer available but has moved
> to
> https://www.unicode.org/wg2/ where more recent working documents are
> available,
> and hopes are that ISO/IEC standards can be stabilized with normative
> references
> to Unicode specs like UTS Unicode Technical Standards and UAX Unicode
> Standard
> Annexes.
>
> > + memmem is in string.h under the __GNU_VISIBLE guard. Does it now need
> to be
> > under a __POSIX_VISIBLE > 2024mmdd and __GNU_VISIBLE?
> >
> > + aligned_alloc in stdlib.h is only guarded by C > 2011. Does that need
> to be an
> > || POSIX >= 2024 also?
> >
> > + C11 and POSIX-2024 add these complex methods.
> >
> > double complex CMPLX(double x, double y);
> > float complex CMPLXF(float x, float y);
> > long double complex CMPLXL(long double x, long double y);
> >
> > FreeBSD has a macro implementation
> > (https://github.com/lattera/freebsd/blob/master/include/complex.h#L49
> > <https://github.com/lattera/freebsd/blob/master/include/complex.h#L49>).
> If I
> > add that to complex.h, does it also need a __ISO_C_VISIBLE >= 2011 ||
> > __POSIX_VISIBLE > 2024mmdd guard?
>
> The same minutes linked above says:
>
>         "The ISO/IEC [POSIX] ballot closes on June 28."
>
> Also note that ISO/IEC 9899:2024 C is targeted for July 12, and JTC 1/SC
> 22/WG
> 14 hope to get that passed by some picky ISO editors in time, or it will
> be
> cancelled for this year.
>
> So look for ISO C >= 2024 and add changes, including docs and compiler
> options,
> and note 202X is becoming ambiguous so groups are using 202Y.
>
> > + Should I continue to look for guards on things that are newly added in
> POSIX
> > 2024 and already in newlib?
> >
> > That's it so far. Just picky stuff that I plan to address given some
> advice.
>
> I am also waiting to see if this will be issued as SUSv5?
>
> --
> Take care. Thanks, Brian Inglis              Calgary, Alberta, Canada
>
> La perfection est atteinte                   Perfection is achieved
> non pas lorsqu'il n'y a plus rien à ajouter  not when there is no more to
> add
> mais lorsqu'il n'y a plus rien à retirer     but when there is no more to
> cut
>                                  -- Antoine de Saint-Exupéry
>