Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!uflorida!novavax!hcx1!bill From: bill@ssd.harris.com (Bill Leonard) Newsgroups: comp.lang.fortran Subject: Re: Two Fortran Standards Message-ID:Date: 15 Aug 89 17:17:03 GMT References: <282@unmvax.unm.edu> Sender: news@hcx1.UUCP Organization: Harris Computer Systems Division Lines: 70 In-reply-to: brainerd@unmvax.unm.edu's message of 14 Aug 89 18:01:11 GMT As the person who made the request of X3 to retain F77, and since I was at the SPARC meeting for this vote, I thought interested FORTRANers might like to hear what went on from a personal observer, rather than second or third hand. Naturally, you should take this report for what it is: my own observations and interpretations of the actions of others. Any errors contained in this report are wholly mine. First, for those unfamiliar with the standards-making organizations, I'll explain who SPARC is: Standards Procedures and Rules Committee. SPARC is a subcommittee of X3, which is the part of ANSI that deals with all information-processing standards. SPARC sets the rules for Technical Committees (TC), like X3J3, and writes the project proposal that directs what the TC can, and cannot, do. First, let me say that Walt is wrong when he says that X3J3 has voted consistently in opposition to subsets and separate standards. X3J3 has been consistently *divided* on this subject! In several straw votes, X3J3 has been almost evenly divided between 1) neither subsets nor separate standards; 2) a subset; 3) a separate standard. The last vote in which I participated was 13-19 on the subject of retaining F77 as a separate standard -- hardly an overwhelming vote on either side. There were many arguments advanced at the SPARC meeting for and against doing this, but the one argument that seemed to carry the most weight was: "Let the users decide." Even those SPARC members who regard 8x as an improvement over F77 recognized that a large segment of the user community do not feel the same, and they feel it is likely that a significant number of those users would, if they had the choice, not choose 8x over F77. They further recognize that the FORTRAN user base is very large and very diverse, and that one language may not necessarily satisfy all. SPARC concluded, therefore, that users should have the choice, unbiased by governmental pressure from ANSI or NIST, between F77 and F8x. Arguments about simplicity/complexity were not much discussed at the SPARC meeting. However, the magnitude of the change from F77 to F8x was an issue, and it seemed to help convince SPARC that F8x is, in reality, a new language from F77, and should be treated thus. There are several precedents for this action. Extended Pascal was issued as a separate standard, as were Full and Minimal Basic. In particular, Extended Pascal was done as a separate standard (I am told) primarily due to concerns about the magnitude of the change. SPARC seemed to be convinced that F77 -> F8x was of much larger magnitude than Classic -> Extended Pascal. You should realize that a number of the largest users were directly represented at SPARC: Social Security Administration, DoD (several times over), Los Alamos National Labs, etc. The SPARC vote was 13-1, so it was hardly a close decision. Several SPARC members felt that this should, perhaps, have been done sooner, but given the realities of the situation, it was better done late than never. By the way, one SPARC member asked me what I thought the international community would do in response to this move. I declined to speculate on the actions of WG5 or ISO; I merely said that my impression was that opposition to F8x seemed to be much lower in other countries than in the U.S. It seems reasonable to me that, if users really are demanding the features in 8x, then retaining FORTRAN 77 will be a no-op, because they'll all be using 8x. I fail to see why the 8x proponents are opposed to giving the users the chance to choose for themselves; it seems a perfect opportunity for them to prove that 8x is better by letting it win in the marketplace, and that they don't need the big club of ANSI or ISO or the U.S. Government to make 8x a success. -- -- Bill Leonard Harris Computer Systems Division 2101 W. Cypress Creek Road Fort Lauderdale, FL 33309 bill@ssd.harris.com or hcx1!bill@uunet.uu.net