Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!uflorida!novavax!hcx1!bill From: bill@ssd.harris.com (Bill Leonard) Newsgroups: comp.lang.fortran Subject: Re: Two Fortran Standards Message-ID: Date: 11 Sep 89 17:38:41 GMT References: <1598@convex.UUCP> <308@unmvax.unm.edu> <369@unmvax.unm.edu> Sender: news@hcx1.UUCP Organization: Harris Computer Systems Division Lines: 47 In-reply-to: brainerd@unmvax.unm.edu's message of 8 Sep 89 15:38:55 GMT > You and Presley have been fussing about this for some time. > If there is some point to all this, I think the readers would like > to hear what it is. Sure, I'll try to make it as simple as I can: 1) The standard has undergone many, many changes over the last year. Text changes have been made wholesale, including some based on the so-called "Green Book" whose origins are clouded in the WG5 mist. 2) In that time, no one has (to my knowledge) made a concerted and detailed effort to ensure that all of FORTRAN-77 is included in FORTRAN/8x, and that there aren't any contradictions between the two. 3) There is no documentation to assist in maintaining the correlation, if any, between F77 and F8x; for instance, there is no cross-reference between the two. F8x uses entirely different language, different terminology, and in some cases uses the same terms used in F77 but with different meanings. I think that makes it very difficult for even X3J3 to reliably ensure that F77 is a true subset of F8x. > Contrary to your insinuations, X3J3 has devoted a lot of time to trying > to ensure that this is the case. A subgroup (led by Mike Metcalf of > CERN, I think), did a complete reading of the two to check this. Of > course, even after very extensive testing there may be a bug, but > somehow, I don't think many people will think this is justification for > dropping the project! This effort was done prior to the many changes made to the draft. Anyway, I never said it was justification for dropping the project -- I never said anything about dropping the project! Don't put words in my mouth! What I said was that this was justification for keeping FORTRAN/77, because it raises well-founded doubts as to whether F77 programs will still be standard-conforming under F8x. (Please note, however, that this is not the only justification.) I hope this is the last time I will have to correct misrepresentations of my statements. -- Bill Leonard Harris Computer Systems Division 2101 W. Cypress Creek Road Fort Lauderdale, FL 33309 bill@ssd.harris.com or hcx1!bill@uunet.uu.net