Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!sdd.hp.com!spool.mu.edu!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!emory!gatech!prism!gt4512c From: gt4512c@prism.gatech.EDU (BRADBERRY,JOHN L) Newsgroups: comp.lang.fortran Subject: Re: What to call next version Message-ID: <21844@hydra.gatech.EDU> Date: 12 Feb 91 12:15:09 GMT References: <7797@exodus.Eng.Sun.COM> <14244@lanl.gov> <7822@exodus.Eng.Sun.COM> <1991Feb12.055337.25661@ariel.unm.edu> Organization: Georgia Institute of Technology Lines: 26 In article <1991Feb12.055337.25661@ariel.unm.edu> john@ghostwheel.unm.edu (John Prentice) writes: >Before we get too busy inventing Fortran Extended Extended (over-extended?), >let me just point out that we don't even have compilers yet for the "old" new >standard (i.e., Fortran Extended) :-) ! > It is one thing to design a language 'on paper' or 'in committee'. It is quite another to adopt, support and USE it in practice. Many people who post to this group seem aware of extensions and extended-extensions to Fortran '90. However, I can't help but wonder if the 'new' version will fall into to the same abyss that the '77 version did. With each push for yet another extension, an adopted, debugged and universally IMPLEMENTED version seems further away... Over the last decade, the gap between what version of Fortran was being taught in universities and used in industry has increased. A large reason for this was the constant state of 'flux' Fortran seems to have been in since 77. Is this a cycle that must be repeated? -- John L. Bradberry |Georgia Tech Research Inst|001100110011001100110011 Scientific Concepts Inc. |Microwaves and Antenna Lab|Int : gt4512c@prism 2359 Windy Hill Rd. 201-J|404 528-5325 (GTRI) |GTRI:jbrad@msd.gatech. Marietta, Ga. 30067 |404 438-4181 (SCI) |'...is this thing on..?'