Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!van-bc!ubc-cs!alberta!mts.ucs.UAlberta.CA!Al_Dunbar From: userAKDU@mts.ucs.UAlberta.CA (Al Dunbar) Newsgroups: comp.lang.fortran Subject: Re: Fortran 90 status Message-ID: Date: Fri, 26 Apr 91 01:43:37 GMT Organization: MTS Univ of Alberta References: <1991Apr25.043355.26420@ariel.unm.edu> <1991Apr25.100524.9831@ariel.unm.edu> Lines: 28 In article <1991Apr25.100524.9831@ariel.unm.edu>, prentice@triton.unm.edu (John Prentice) writes: >In article khb@chiba.Eng.Sun.COM (Keith Bierman fpgroup) writes: >>However, in the last go round several "minor" players such as IBM, >>Amdahl, Sun, DECUS, and misc. national labs (and several foregin ones) >>voted Aye. > >If Fortran Extended is not going to be recognized outside the U.S., then >why are foreign reps voting on it (or am I confused about what is the >U.S. standard versus the international one - ugh) ? Anyone know what >the votes of the DOE labs were? Foreign reps are _NOT_ voting on "Fortran Extended", they are voting on the new international Fortran Standard. Since ANSI (read "the USA") have opted to retain the previous Fortran standard in addition to adopting a new one, they have apparently decided to call the new one "Fortran Extended" in order to differentiate. Since ISO/WG5 (read "the rest of the world") is replacing the old Fortran standard with the new one, they have decided to call the new standard Fortran. I feel this makes sense, else they will eventually have to adopt a standard called something like: "the most wonderfully splendiferous and magnificent Fortran" :-) -------------------+------------------------------------------- Al Dunbar | Edmonton, Alberta | Disclaimer: "I disclaim disclaimers" CANADA | -------------------+------------------------------------------- #!