Re: public comment on fortran 2008

On Thu, 03 Jul 2008 22:04:23 -0500, Gary Scott posted:

Michael Prager wrote:

Dan Nagle <dannagle@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:


Hello,

On 2008-07-03 16:21:50 -0400, Michael Prager
<Mike.Prager.indigo@xxxxxxxx> said:

<snip>

There are Fortran programmers who find even Fortran 90 too
modern. I don't agree with that sentiment, but surely it
doesn't serve the user base to have the language always a moving
target.

My personal feeling is that if there is a true deficiency or need in the
language, it should be addressed by the standard with some urgency. Now
whether huge numbers of new features should be incorporated at once is
another issue. There should be limits based upon a reasonable survey of
vendor resources. It is quite disappointing though, to have to wait
ten, fifteen, or twenty years for that one feature that you personnally
feel is important.

I can't help feel that the resources applied to the problem set doesn't
match task size. If it takes more than four years to update a compiler
to a new standard, there is a serious mismatch (I actually think that
should be two years).

What an interesting thread this is with its view of the wizards behind the
curtain! Does anyone know whether parameterized derived types aren't a
true deficiency? I certainly won't as I have no experience with them,
because they're not something I can compile in the languages I use (a bit
of a catch-22 with new language features). Does anyone know a priori that
it isn't a bad logic game?

I've been thinking about comments I might make and had something similar to
what others have said here, however, with less expertise to motivate. Not
every standard is equally ground-breaking. I was unaware of Dan's claim
that f08 is largely a tuning up of f95.

As Joe User, I would rather have a standard-conforming fortran compiler
from this century than PDT's. What does Richard mean with interp? BTW,
43/45=95.5 repeating.
--
Before a man speaks it is always safe to assume that he is a fool. After he
speaks, it is seldom necessary to assume it.
H. L. Mencken
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Help from fellow Fortran Users
    ... and Fortran in which he introduced the subject of Pascal, ... Pascal is a useful, high-level, portable language that is easy to use ... Inasmuch as his comments considered extensions for Pascal in the '70s, ... standard differs from ...
    (comp.lang.fortran)
  • Re: one-liner for characater replacement
    ... convert to another language. ... upgrade to upward compatible versions of the same language. ... Under the above rules of the game, unless the Fortran world announces ...  The user base has not shrunk all that much. ...
    (comp.lang.fortran)
  • Re: one-liner for characater replacement
    ... convert to another language. ... upgrade to upward compatible versions of the same language. ... So what I'm saying is that the future users of new Fortran features ... Are you seeing that the fortran user base - although a shadow of what ...
    (comp.lang.fortran)
  • Re: Reading from a character array
    ... deltaquattro wrote: ... library is added to the next generation of the language, as for C++, ... Fortran doesn't use the word "library", ... Fortran standard doesn't tell you which negative numbers indicate ...
    (comp.lang.fortran)
  • Re: In the Shallow End
    ... You've never used fortran so obviously, again, you don't know what you are talking about. ... But the language standard did not stand still either. ... Linux has this nice feeture that allows you to exit a running account and login as yourself in a secondary account to stop a process that went astray. ...
    (comp.sys.mac.advocacy)