(j3.2006) EX editing

Bill Long longb
Wed Apr 5 19:24:42 EDT 2017

I recall there was an edit before to fix a missing 0X in the Note. Because it conflicted with 

"	? An input field that is a hexadecimal-significand number consists of an optional sign, followed by the hexadecimal indicator which is the digit 0 immediately followed by the letter X, followed by a hexadecimal significand followed by a hexadecimal exponent.?

on the grounds that what you output with EX should be readable with EX.  But the output form at does look wrong. 


On Apr 5, 2017, at 2:47 PM, John Reid <John.Reid at stfc.ac.uk> wrote:

> Hi,
> I think there is a mistake in EX editing (page 278). The IEEE 
> standard requires the "hexIndicator" 0X to appear before the first digit 
> and it does in NOTE 13.14, but it is not mentioned in the text. I 
> suggest the edit
> [278:15] Before "x_0" add "0X".
> Is it intended that x_0 be a binary digit? NOTE 13.14 suggests that this 
> is so. Should we say so? If not, is it processor dependent? Perhaps the 
> output in the second example of NOTE 13.14 should be -0XF.A000P+000
> Cheers,
> John.
> _______________________________________________
> J3 mailing list
> J3 at mailman.j3-fortran.org
> http://mailman.j3-fortran.org/mailman/listinfo/j3

Bill Long                                                                       longb at cray.com
Principal Engineer, Fortran Technical Support &   voice:  651-605-9024
Bioinformatics Software Development                      fax:  651-605-9143
Cray Inc./ 2131 Lindau Lane/  Suite 1000/  Bloomington, MN  55425

More information about the J3 mailing list