Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!swrinde!cs.utexas.edu!sun-barr!newstop!male!texsun!convex!psmith From: psmith@convex.com (Presley Smith) Newsgroups: comp.lang.fortran Subject: Re: Fortran 90 status Message-ID: <1991Apr25.140056.5438@convex.com> Date: 25 Apr 91 14:00:56 GMT References: <1991Apr24.202115.16119@dragon.wpd.sgi.com> Sender: usenet@convex.com (news access account) Organization: Convex Computer Corporation, Richardson, Tx. Lines: 57 Nntp-Posting-Host: mozart.convex.com In article khb@chiba.Eng.Sun.COM (Keith Bierman fpgroup) writes: > ... Deleted text ... > > *) I believe that the vote was 26-9 to accept the document as it > stood after the edits. Two copies of the marked up document were > carried to Walt Brainerd (by two different X3J3 members, to > protect against lossage due to a plane crash). Voting against > were the reps from: Microsoft, Convex, Cray, Lahey, Harris, DoD, > Boeing, Unisys and DEC. It should be noted that an organizations rep > votes aye or nay does not necessarily imply that the > organization will or won't build, support, use, or fondle "Fortran90". > I just wanted to thank Kieth for his statement that a nay or aye does not imply that an organization will or will not build a Fortran 90 product. The situation is similar to an election for something like the President of the United States... Even if I didn't vote for the person who is elected, once he/she is the president, I will support that person. I still may not agree with all he/she stands for but he/she is the president. The groups that voted NO on the proposed standard have their reasons for voting NO. - There are concerns that this is not the right standard for the Fortran community. - There are concerns that many parts of the standard have never been implemented and that there will be major flaws found in implementation. (The committee made 93 additional changes at this last meeting...) I could continue this list, but most of it has been said before. The point is that Fortran 90 is going to become the International Standard replacing FORTRAN 77 at the ISO level. In the U.S. there will be two Fortran standards... FORTRAN 77 and this Fortran 90 standard which is currently called Fortran Extended by the X3 community. When X3 determined that FORTRAN 77 would be preserved as a standard in the U.S., the name of Fortran 90 had not been firmly established. Since the precident was set with other standards having the "extended" term added, X3 used that name in it's efforts. It has and remains the intent of X3 for Fortran Extended and the ISO Fortran 90 to be exactly the same document. (There's been debate on this before... I was at the X3 meeting when they X3 to keep FORTRAN 77. It was explicitly stated at that meeting that Fortran Extended would be the ISO Fortran 90 standard.) Bottom line is that Fortran 90 has been approved and will be a new Fortran standard. Those that voted nay will accept that and make their future Fortran plans accordingly. The election is over and the outcome is clear. Thanks Keith for adding the insight to your comments.