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