Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!gem.mps.ohio-state.edu!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!uflorida!stat!stat.fsu.edu!mccalpin From: mccalpin@masig3.masig3.ocean.fsu.edu (John D. McCalpin) Newsgroups: comp.lang.fortran Subject: Re: X3 Vote on Fortran 8x Message-ID: Date: 20 Oct 89 10:53:14 GMT References: <2192@convex.UUCP> <426@unmvax.unm.edu> Sender: news@stat.fsu.edu Distribution: comp.lang.fortran Organization: Supercomputer Computations Research Institute Lines: 39 In-reply-to: brainerd@unmvax.unm.edu's message of 19 Oct 89 23:58:13 GMT In article <426@unmvax.unm.edu> brainerd@unmvax.unm.edu (Walt Brainerd) writes: >This vote will have many effects that could be _disastrous_ for the >ENTIRE Fortran community. The reasons have been elaborated previously >on this news, but the most serious may be that the US appears to have >told the world that we are no longer interested in cooperating with them >in producing a Fortran standard. Another way to look at this is to say that the committee is not interested in replacing a language that works with a language that has not even been implemented yet, until the new language proves itself in the field. I got the impression from Presley's message that the extended Fortran standard will still be a joint ANSI/ISO standard. Is this incorrect? >Another symptom of the economic decline >of the US, it seems to me. It amazes me that people who claim to be experts >in the business of computing (or any other, for that matter) can formally >vote to change the basic goals and design specs of a project that is >in a final testing phase and believe that the product produced is consistent >with the new goals and specs. I think it is fascinating that you think that this language is in the "final testing phase", when the language has never even been implemented! It would be far more accurate to say that the language is in the final _specification_ phase. I *like* the new programming language contained in Fortran-8X (though I would rather have an adaptation of this language without the need for FORTRAN-77 compatibility --- maybe Modula-2 + Fortran-8X extensions!), and if I had a working compiler I would switch to it right away to see whether it was worthwhile or not. But I think that this language will have to prove itself in the marketplace before it replaces FORTRAN-77 for everyone.... -- John D. McCalpin - mccalpin@masig1.ocean.fsu.edu mccalpin@scri1.scri.fsu.edu mccalpin@delocn.udel.edu