Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!ut-sally!ut-emx!reeder
From: reeder@ut-emx.UUCP (William P. Reeder)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.fortran
Subject: Re: F8X: MODULE vs. INCLUDE
Message-ID: <1167@ut-emx.UUCP>
Date: 11 Mar 88 00:51:05 GMT
References: <1112@ut-emx.UUCP> <6690013@hpclcdb.HP.COM>
Organization: University of Texas Computation Center
Lines: 27

In article <6690013@hpclcdb.HP.COM>, cdb@hpclcdb.HP.COM (Carl Burch) writes:
> uncheckable dependent compilation.  With MODULEs, the revision date can
> be checked by the compiler between the source and the preprocessed module 
> to ensure that your compilation is consistent.

Well, I'm not sure what you mean about checking the revision date on a
MODULE.  Could you explain further, also discuss why this also can't be
done with INCLUDE files (pretend I don't have to deal with VSOS or
CMS).

> As for X3J3 only standardizing "existing practice", that's equivalent to
> saying that only vendors should be allowed to do language design.  One of

I just hate the idea of committees doing design work.  I would like to
think that the vendors have a small number of folks doing design work,
most of the team being programmers who implement the design.  There
are also researchers at universities doing design work.  (Also
hopefully not by committee.)

> 							Carl Burch
> 							HP Fortran Team

-- 
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.