Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!ut-sally!ut-emx!reeder
From: reeder@ut-emx.UUCP (William P. Reeder)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.fortran
Subject: Re: Fortran 8x features, case sensitivity.
Message-ID: <1067@ut-emx.UUCP>
Date: 3 Mar 88 21:58:51 GMT
References: <500@a.UUCP>
Organization: University of Texas Computation Center
Lines: 31
Keywords: Standard review.
Summary: definition of purpose of new standard.

In article <500@a.UUCP>, jlg@a.UUCP (Jim Giles) writes:
> 
> First, to set the record straight, the correct spelling is 'Fortran'
> not 'FORTRAN'.  I don't know why, but both ANSI and ISO use the first
> spelling.  No one uses 'fortran' at all.
> 
First, 'PASCAL' isn't spelled 'Pascal', 'ALGOL' isn't spelled 'Algol', 
'C' isn't spelled 'C' (oops, experimental error :-), and 'FORTRAN' 
shouldn't be spelled 'Fortran'.  ANSI tried (on page I, lines 22-23) to 
redefine the spelling of FORTRAN, but I reject this just as I reject S8 
as a new standard.

> The criterion for Fortran 8x features (in my opinion) should be to
> certify existing practice or to extend the language in a significant
> way.  I will use this criterion throughout this discussion.
> 
I think (but only when absolutely neccessary ;^) that the standards 
committee should generally only standardize existing practice.  I am
willing to make an exception for those features which (lots of) users 
have wanted but no vendor has been willing to implement (are there any 
that fit this criterion?).

The reason that I don't want committees inventing significant extensions
to ANY language should be obvious -- do we need any more camels or 
platypusses (or is it platypi, hmm...) ?

-- 
William {Wills,Card,Weekly,Virtual} Reeder	reeder@emx.utexas.edu
The Looniversity of TexMex at Autism, Consternation Central, Austin TX 78712 

DISCLAIMER:	I speak only for myself, and usually only to myself.