Re: C11/POSIX-2024 Questions

I thought I would return to the question of what value _POSIX_C_SOURCE
should have.

Issue 8 HTML is on the opengroup.org site now.

https://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9799919799/functions/V2_chap02.html

Has it as 202405L.

Brian is there any reason to think it could also be 202406L now?

--joel

On Fri, Jun 28, 2024 at 5:34 PM <[email protected]> wrote:

> POSIX is also ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 22/WG 15 ISO/IEC 9945:2024 in DIS ballot.
>
> Probably easier to look for changes from drafts and propose changes and
> comments, then wait for both ISO/IEC ballots to pass or ISO/IEC updates to
> be
> cancelled, before applying updates.
>
> On 2024-06-28 16:01, Joel Sherrill wrote:
> > 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]
> > <mailto:[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
> >     <
> 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
> >     <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/ <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>
> >      > <
> 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
> >
>
> --
> 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
>
>