Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!att!osu-cis!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!mailrus!cornell!batcomputer!itsgw!steinmetz!vdsvax!sierra!lamson
From: lamson@sierra.uucp (scott h lamson)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.fortran
Subject: Re: WG-5 ultimatum, is a FIPS standard uninteresting?
Message-ID: <5718@vdsvax.steinmetz.ge.com>
Date: 6 Oct 88 12:00:15 GMT
References: <838@cernvax.UUCP> <44400024@hcx2> <140@microsoft.UUCP>
Sender: news@vdsvax.steinmetz.ge.com
Lines: 21
In-reply-to: bobal@microsoft.UUCP's message of 4 Oct 88 23:35:30 GMT


> : bobal@microsoft.UUCP (Bob Allison) writes:

>Can we expect Fortran to continue
>its widespread availability if a new standard comes out (eliminating the
>Fortran 77 standard) and the government doesn't use it very much?

While ADA will increase in importance for delivered software, there
is too much research and engineering work supported by Fortran
analytic codes to make Fortran no longer needed.  Even for govt funded
development, where analysis is required to support engineering
(CFD to design turbine blades, etc) there is nothing I have heard of
to suggest ADA will be required or even encouraged to use in CAE
codes.  I see Fortran having a respectable market regardless of ADA or
FIPS.



        Scott|  ARPA:      lamson@ge-crd.arpa
       Lamson|  UUCP:      uunet!steinmetz!sierra!lamson
(518)387-5795|  UUCP:      uunet!steinmetz!lamson!crd