Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ukma!xanth!mcnc!ecsvax!urjlew
From: urjlew@ecsvax.UUCP (Rostyk Lewyckyj)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.fortran
Subject: Re: Name of Fortran 8X [was: so much for X3J3]
Summary: 96
Keywords: WG5, ANSI, X3J3, Fortran, FORTRAN, standard
Message-ID: <6796@ecsvax.UUCP>
Date: 11 Apr 89 04:47:18 GMT
References: <24032@beta.lanl.gov> <97753@sun.Eng.Sun.COM> <24066@beta.lanl.gov> <8018@boring.cwi.nl>
Organization: UNC Educational Computing Service
Lines: 26


Mr Shapiro asks us what we would like the new Fortran standard 
to be called. Well I say ;-):

Make it FORTRAN 96. To symbolize two entities X3J3 - WG5 or commitee - 
users in juxtaposition directly opposite to a loving couple 69.
Also it may take up to 1996 to get this off the ground and into
working compilers.
I still think they should have cleaned up PL/I instead. I want:
- literal statement labels
- grouping of statements a la  DO ... END, which fit nicely into
   if (cond) then st1 else st2 , to replace st1 & st2. Rather than
   a similar looking but different semantics of if (cond) then
   + statements + endif, and the else elseif statements.
- multiple statements on a line,
and some other PL/I comforts, of course without many of the pains
like defaulting to FIXED DECIMAL for parameters, no backspace,
no variable FORMAT (run time FORMAT interpreter).
   
This was originally meant as a mailed reply to Mr. Shapiro,
but the news return path bounced, so I decided to post.
-----------------------------------------------
  Reply-To:  Rostyslaw Jarema Lewyckyj
             urjlew@ecsvax.UUCP ,  urjlew@unc.bitnet
       or    urjlew@tucc.tucc.edu    (ARPA,SURA,NSF etc. internet)
       tel.  (919)-962-9107