Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!usc!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!jato!vsnyder From: vsnyder@jato.jpl.nasa.gov (Van Snyder) Newsgroups: comp.lang.fortran Subject: Re: Fortran 90 status Message-ID: <1991Apr26.192223.26014@jato.jpl.nasa.gov> Date: 26 Apr 91 19:22:23 GMT References: <1991Apr24.202115.16119@dragon.wpd.sgi.com> <1991Apr25.235111.26282@alchemy.chem.utoronto.ca> Reply-To: vsnyder@jato.Jpl.Nasa.Gov (Van Snyder) Organization: Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena, CA Lines: 21 In article <1991Apr25.235111.26282@alchemy.chem.utoronto.ca> mroussel@alchemy.chem.utoronto.ca (Marc Roussel) writes: >Before I write anything more, I wish to make it clear that I am just >trying to satisfy my curiosity. I do not wish in any way to denigrate >the efforts nor to question the motives of anyone on X3J3. > >In article khb@chiba.Eng.Sun.COM >(Keith Bierman fpgroup) writes: >> *) I believe that the vote was 26-9 to accept the document as it >> stood after the edits... > >Why would anyone vote against the standard at this late date? Are there >outstanding technical problems with the standard which these objectors >felt needed to be adressed before the standard is released? > One of the NO voters has informed me a great part of the decision to vote no was because of the poor quality of exposition in the standard document. At least I have one ear on the committee who agrees with me. -- vsnyder@jato.Jpl.Nasa.Gov ames!elroy!jato!vsnyder vsnyder@jato.uucp