Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!uflorida!gatech!psuvax1!psuvm!cunyvm!byuvax!hallidayd
From: hallidayd@yvax.byu.edu
Newsgroups: comp.lang.fortran
Subject: Re: Two Fortran Standards
Message-ID: <786hallidayd@yvax.byu.edu>
Date: 5 Sep 89 09:07:26 GMT
Lines: 30

Walt Brainerd (brainerd@unmvax.unm.edu), as to your message
(<305@unmvax.unm.edu>)

>In article <12687@pur-ee.UUCP>, hankd@pur-ee.UUCP (Hank Dietz) writes:
>>
>> Did I miss someone talking about a Fortran subset standard?  I'd be perfectly
>> happy if they kept Fortran 77 active as the subset dialect standard.  ;-)
>>
>This is an alternative that makes a lot more sense
>than what X3 is proposing (i.e., two different standards and two different
>documents).  X3J3 is currently conducting a poll to see whether the X3 idea
>of two standards or the subset idea is preferred, given that one will be
>forced by X3.

I most certainly prefer the subset idea.

Who is being poled by X3J3?  I suspect that the venders who have been voting
against Fortran 8x because they feel it is to much of a change (it's such a
change because FORTRAN has not been keeping up with the times) would prefer to
have Fortran 8x be a separate standard so they won't have to market their
compilers as subset compilers --- but in reality, this is what a FORTRAN 77
compiler will be (at least as far as I am concerned).

   _____________________________________________________________________
  / David Halliday                                                      \
  |                                                                     |
  | Internet:    hallidayd@yvax.byu.edu  or  hallidayd@acoust.byu.edu   |
  | BITNET:      hallidayd@byuvax  or  hallidayd%acoust.byu.edu@utahcca |
  | Us Mail:     BYU Physics Department                                 |
  |              296 ESC                                                |
  |              Provo, UT  84602                                       |
  \_____________________________________________________________________/