Path: utzoo!utgpu!watmath!iuvax!cica!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!unmvax!brainerd
From: brainerd@unmvax.unm.edu (Walt Brainerd)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.fortran
Subject: Re: X3 Vote on Fortran 8x
Message-ID: <432@unmvax.unm.edu>
Date: 20 Oct 89 23:50:07 GMT
References: <428@unmvax.unm.edu> <14101@lanl.gov>
Distribution: comp.lang.fortran
Organization: University of New Mexico at Albuquerque
Lines: 22

In article <14101@lanl.gov>, jlg@lanl.gov (Jim Giles) writes:
> From article <428@unmvax.unm.edu>, by brainerd@unmvax.unm.edu (Walt Brainerd):
> > [...]                                       WG5 did request addition of
> > pointers, but so did a large number of American commentors; and it replaced
> > RANGE and identify, which were at least as complicated.   [...]
> 
> Pointers do _not_ replace RANGE and IDENTIFY.

I apologize; I should anticipate these reactions more readily and be
a bit a bit more specific.  The only thing being discussed was complexity.
Range and identify were taken out and pointers put in.
In terms of total complexity, at least there was not a large increase;
that is the sense in which pointers replaced range and identify.

Of course, some of the functionality of range can be done with pointers,
but I do not want to argue about which is better again at this time
(unless others want to).
-- 
Walt Brainerd  Unicomp, Inc.           brainerd@unmvax.cs.unm.edu
               2002 Quail Run Dr. NE
               Albuquerque, NM 87122
               505/275-0800