Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!mailrus!umix!metavax!chris
From: chris@metavax.UUCP (Chris Collins )
Newsgroups: comp.lang.fortran
Subject: Re: Fortran 8x
Message-ID: <3095@metavax.UUCP>
Date: 25 Mar 88 04:24:10 GMT
References: <522@a.UUCP> <2243@ttrdc.UUCP> <6415@ames.arpa>
Reply-To: chris@metavax.UUCP (Chris Collins )
Distribution: na
Organization: Meta Systems, Ltd. -- Ann Arbor, MI
Lines: 26
Keywords: Fortran 8x standard

In article <6415@ames.arpa> eugene@pioneer.UUCP (Eugene N. Miya) writes:
>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)."  

Here, here! This is exactly what I want to see.  It's much easier to
accept a decision when you know the reasons behind it.  Then, you can
give counter reasons, etc., but at least one round of the discussion is
eliminated.  Many times, all discussion is eliminated by the reason.

For example, a macro language was discussed early in the X3J3 proceedings,
but was not included in the current draft.  In my email with a net and
X3J3 member, it was excluded due to time constraints.  I have no great 
problem with this IF I know this is the reason.


    ------ 
   /MM/\MM\          META SYSTEMS, LTD.
  /MM/  \MM\         315 E. Eisenhower
 /MM/ /\ \MM\            Suite 200
 ===  ==  ===       Ann Arbor, MI  48108
 \SS\ \/ /SS/
  \SS\  /SS/        Chris Collins, Senior Programmer
   \SS\/SS/
    ------          My colleagues chastised me for not saying these aren't
		    my company's opinions. Companies don't have opinions.