Xref: utzoo comp.lang.misc:2349 comp.lang.fortran:1625 comp.lang.c:14807 comp.lang.pascal:1296 comp.lang.c++:2252 comp.lang.modula2:1173 Path: utzoo!utgpu!attcan!uunet!tektronix!percival!parsely!agora!ihf1!bobd From: bobd@ihf1.UUCP (Bob Dietrich) Newsgroups: comp.lang.misc,comp.lang.fortran,comp.lang.c,comp.lang.pascal,comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.modula2 Subject: Re: Linkage Declaration (was Re: Standardization (of FORTRAN, Ada, ect.)) Keywords: linkage,BLISS Message-ID: <473@ihf1.UUCP> Date: 13 Dec 88 19:39:39 GMT References: <395@ubbpc.UUCP> <311@csun1.UUCP> <2086@garth.UUCP> Reply-To: bobd@ihf1.UUCP (Bob Dietrich) Followup-To: comp.lang.misc Organization: Intel Corp., Hillsboro, Oregon Lines: 38 In article <2086@garth.UUCP> phipps@garth.UUCP (Clay Phipps) writes: >Wulf attested to the high value of the scheme, >but regretted the lack of a more complete solution. >He concluded that he assumed that "the solution lies in getting >an adequate characterization of ... the (rather vague) notion >of `environment' explicitly into the language, together with >primitive operators for its manipulation". > >Now if only the standards committees for languages like FORTRAN, >Pascal, C, &c. would translate something like this into >idioms that fit those languages. I can dream, can't I ? A couple of things I might point out. The first is that language standard committees have their own "turf"; their charter usually precludes them from addressing areas other than the language at hand. This has it's good and bad points. I don't want a language committee dictating what characteristics the linker (if there is one) and the rest of the environment must take on, although it might define certain minimal requirements. If you've ever considered implementing something like fork() on a non-operating system like DOS, you wouldn't like to be forced in that direction by a language standard either. The second point is that there is at least one international committee (one of the ISO Working Groups in the range WG10..WG12) that is working on these isssues. I'm too lazy to look up which one it is. There may also be an American committee, but I'm not sure. > >The widespread postings to language news-groups were to get everyone's >attention; follow-ups might best be limited to "comp.lang.misc". They have been. > >Clay Phipps {ingr,pyramid,sri-unix!hplabs}!garth!phipps usenet: uunet!littlei!intelhf!ihf1!bobd Bob Dietrich or tektronix!ogccse!omepd!ihf1!bobd Intel Corp., Hillsboro, Oregon or tektronix!psu-cs!omepd!ihf1!bobd (503) 696-2092