Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!cmcl2!beta!hc!ames!pioneer!eugene
From: eugene@pioneer.arpa (Eugene N. Miya)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.fortran
Subject: Re: Fortran 8x
Message-ID: <6415@ames.arpa>
Date: 24 Mar 88 16:47:05 GMT
References: <522@a.UUCP> <2243@ttrdc.UUCP>
Sender: usenet@ames.arpa
Reply-To: eugene@pioneer.UUCP (Eugene N. Miya)
Distribution: na
Organization: NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, Calif.
Lines: 19
Keywords: Fortran 8x standard

It occurred to me driving home last evening that ANSI X3J3 should have
published a "Rationale for the Changes to Fortran" similar to the "Rationale
for the Design of Ada(tm)."  The "Ada Rationale" was (and is) quite widely
read and it explains a lot of thinking behind modern language design.
The problem with Fortran is the bulk of pre-existing code, but if, rather
than present pure synatx (and semantics), they had taken a bit more time to
explain the problems they were trying to address, I think a lot of grief
could have been minimized.  This should have been done PRIOR to the actual
release of the draft proposed standard.  Such a Rationale could have
addressed the problems of WHY depreciated features presented problems, as
well and suggestions for conversion, etc.  The Standards document addresses
none of this, only specifies the form and the function.  Anyway, next time.

From the Rock of Ages Home for Retired Hackers:

--eugene miya, NASA Ames Research Center, eugene@ames-aurora.ARPA
  "You trust the `reply' command with all those different mailers out there?"
  "Send mail, avoid follow-ups.  If enough, I'll summarize."
  {uunet,hplabs,hao,ihnp4,decwrl,allegra,tektronix}!ames!aurora!eugene