Path: utzoo!utgpu!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!lll-ncis!helios.ee.lbl.gov!nosc!ucsd!ames!haven!umbc3!mbph!hybl
From: hybl@mbph.UUCP (Albert Hybl  Dept of Biophysics  SM)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.fortran
Subject: An exercise in fultility
Keywords: tradmark validation_suite portability
Message-ID: <584@mbph.UUCP>
Date: 6 Jan 89 00:28:13 GMT
Organization: University of Maryland, School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21201
Lines: 71


In article <583@mbph.UUCP> hybl@mbph.UUCP (Albert Hybl
Dept of Biophysics  SM), I wrote:
>
> After our law makers write and pass laws, the laws appear in a
> publication of state or federal statutes.  The legislature
> will try to correct a discovered flaw or ambiguity in a law
> during their next session.  In rare cases, a special
> session may be called to tackle the problem.  Ambiguities in
> the law can also be resolved by the courts.  All new laws,
> recently revised laws and notes of court cases are placed in
> the "Cumulative Annual Pocket Part" which is placed in the
> back of the appropriate volume of the statutes.

In message <83515@sun.uucp> khb@sun.UUCP (Keith Bierman - Sun
Tactical Engineering, Sun Microsystems, Mountain View) replied:
} 
} Our ANSI committee is similar. It sits in judgement of x3.8-1978, and
} this question was brought to them, and they decided that the plain
} meaning of the standard is that the code is WRONG. Thus compilers are
} allowed to do whatever they want.
}
The phrase "this question" refers to Steven Weintraub's
"Dubious Fortran Code Problem."  If Keith is right, then
the results of KEITH = SQRT(-16.00) could conceivably be
+4.0, -4.0, 42, x3.8-1978 on some machines or a useful diagnostic
on other machines!  This is an absurdity; obviously taking the SQRT
of a negative number "is WRONG.  Thus compilers are allowed to do
whatever they want."  Right?  As a user, I want every compiler
to produce the same result.  After all, the purpose of the
Fortran ANSI X3.9 1978 standard "is to promote portability
of FORTRAN programs for use on a variety of data processing
systems."
} 
} Issues brought before the comittee can be read about in the
} minutes of the meetings. Subscriptions are about $150/yr.
} Sign up as an Observer.  A condensed and cleaned up version
} should appear periodically, and FORTEC Forum would be a
} good venue.
} 
I am a member of national ACM and subscribe to Fortan Form.
I agree that it is a good venue to publish the "Cumulative
Annual Pocket Part" containing new extensions and
revisions of old language in the ANSI FORTRAN standard.
I was disappointed when the committee did not publish
the proposed 8x Standard in Fortran Forum.

I think that the committee is without real power!  They
can not enforce the standard so their panegyrist says
'When the code is WRONG, the compilers are allowed to
do whatever they want.'  If the name FORTRAN is not a
registered trademark, anyone can use it to sell anything.

I think that a trademark must be registered for the Language.
A Fortran Validation Suite must be created and before a compiler
is allowed to use the trademark it must pass the validation tests.
A registered trademark is a powerful tool.  The Mead Data Central
Inc., the firm that markets computerized legal data-base
services under the registered trademark Lexis, used the courts
to prevent Toyota Motor Corp from marketing a new line of cars
under the name Lexus.  Unless a Fortran Standardizing Organization
is willing and able to legally enforce the Standard, this
discussion will have been nothing but an exercise in futility.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Albert Hybl, PhD.              Office UUCP: uunet!mimsy!mbph!hybl
Department of Biophysics       Home   UUCP: uunet!mimsy!mbph!hybl!ah
University of Maryland                CoSy: ahybl
School of Medicine
Baltimore, MD  21201                 Phone: (301) 328-7940 (Office)
----------------------------------------------------------------------