Rw.Hutchinson@f503.n151.z1.fidonet.org (Rw Hutchinson) (04/04/91)
Has anyone any idea when the ISO standard for Modula-2 might become final? I just asked one major vendor of Modula-2 compilers whether they planned to include features in the draft standard in forthcoming releases, and their reply was: "We wait until the standard is final." The local Physics Dept. may adopt Modula-2 as its default programming language for graduate students, (interest sparked by the comp-sci dept. announcing that it is about to teach Modula-2 to undergraduates), and one of its considerations is whether complex numbers are supported as a built-in data type. I recall that complex numbers ARE included in the draft standard, but that as of now few or no compilers support them. Such support would entail rewriting all the trigonometric functions, for example, if don e properly. -- uucp: uunet!m2xenix!puddle!151!503!Rw.Hutchinson Internet: Rw.Hutchinson@f503.n151.z1.fidonet.org
Pat.Terry@p101.f4.n494.z5.fidonet.org (Pat Terry) (04/05/91)
In a message of <Apr 03 14:18>, Rw Hutchinson (1:151/503.4) writes: >Has anyone any idea when the ISO standard for Modula-2 might become final? RSN (grin) >built-in data type. I recall that complex numbers ARE included in the >draft standard, but that as of now few or no compilers support them. They probably aren't in any current implementations, because they were never in M-2. The next draft proposal will include them, effectively FORTRAN like. -- uucp: uunet!m2xenix!puddle!5!494!4.101!Pat.Terry Internet: Pat.Terry@p101.f4.n494.z5.fidonet.org
Markus.Weiss@p6.f7010.n241.z2.fidonet.org (Markus Weiss) (04/06/91)
Hi > Has anyone any idea when the ISO standard for Modula-2 might become > final? I can reach a guy, who has a closer contact to the ISO group, in our German Mod2 Echo. If he can give me an answer I'll post it here. Bye, Markus -- uucp: uunet!m2xenix!puddle!2!241!7010.6!Markus.Weiss Internet: Markus.Weiss@p6.f7010.n241.z2.fidonet.org
jmh@coyote.datalog.com (John Hughes) (04/07/91)
In article <812.27FC4CE9@puddle.fidonet.org> Pat.Terry@p101.f4.n494.z5.fidonet.org (Pat Terry) writes: >In a message of <Apr 03 14:18>, Rw Hutchinson (1:151/503.4) writes: > > >Has anyone any idea when the ISO standard for Modula-2 might become final? > >RSN (grin) > > >built-in data type. I recall that complex numbers ARE included in the > >draft standard, but that as of now few or no compilers support them. > >They probably aren't in any current implementations, because they were never in >M-2. The next draft proposal will include them, effectively FORTRAN like. > Anyone know what the current rev. level on the draft is? My copy says something to the effect of 'D106/N336 29 October 1989'. Is there a newer revision running about? -- | John M. Hughes | "...unfolding in consciousness at the | | datalog.com!moondog!jmh | deliberate speed of pondering." - Daniel Dennet | | jmh%coyote@noao.edu |--------------------------------------------------| | jmh%moondog@datalog.com | P.O.Box 43305, Tucson, AZ 85733 602-624-8008 |
Pat.Terry@p101.f4.n494.z5.fidonet.org (Pat Terry) (04/10/91)
>Anyone know what the current rev. level on the draft is? My copy says >something to the effect of 'D106/N336 29 October 1989'. Is there a >newer revision running about? D106 is the latest. I thought it was dated 1990 though. -- uucp: uunet!m2xenix!puddle!5!494!4.101!Pat.Terry Internet: Pat.Terry@p101.f4.n494.z5.fidonet.org
jmh@coyote.datalog.com (John Hughes) (04/12/91)
In article <1313.2803A79C@puddle.fidonet.org> Pat.Terry@p101.f4.n494.z5.fidonet.org (Pat Terry) writes: > > >Anyone know what the current rev. level on the draft is? My copy says > >something to the effect of 'D106/N336 29 October 1989'. Is there a > >newer revision running about? > >D106 is the latest. I thought it was dated 1990 though. > >-- >uucp: uunet!m2xenix!puddle!5!494!4.101!Pat.Terry >Internet: Pat.Terry@p101.f4.n494.z5.fidonet.org Well, lessee here... Nope. 1989. Have there been any additional thoughts on the '?' portions, such as in section 5.8? Also, I'm curious as to the thinking behind the modification of the way in which modules are defined (ie. the 'priority' identifier is apparently gone, and replaced with 'protection'). It's entirely possible that I'm stumbling while trying to read through the mass of the spec, so any light you'd care to shed would be appreciated. -- | John M. Hughes | "...unfolding in consciousness at the | | datalog.com!moondog!jmh | deliberate speed of pondering." - Daniel Dennet | | jmh%coyote@noao.edu |--------------------------------------------------| | jmh%moondog@datalog.com | P.O.Box 43305, Tucson, AZ 85733 602-624-8008 |
ercs50@castle.ed.ac.uk (student) (04/13/91)
Student writes ...
Rw. Hutchinson asks about the Modula-2 Standard. My
information is that things are progressing albeit
slowly. I would be surprised if its finished this
year. The current draft is D106/N336 dated 29th October
1989. The next issue is rumoured to be scheduled for
about the spring of this year. Its getting bigger all
the time.
Hutchinson is correct in his belief that complex numbers
are supported. This was proposed by the Canadian
committee following their introduction into the
ANSI Standard for Extended Pascal. A brief summary
is as follows:-
type-identifiers COMPLEX
LONGCOMPLEX
operators + - * /
functions CMPLX constructor
RE extractor
IM extractor
Two maths-libraries are proposed: ComplexMath and
LongComplexMath. The latest proposal that I have
seen dedfines the first as:-
DEFINITION MODULE ComplexMath;
PROCEDURE abs(cmplx: COMPLEX): REAL;
PROCEDURE arg(cmplx: COMPLEX): REAL;
PROCEDURE exp(cmplx: COMPLEX): COMPLEX;
PROCEDURE ln(cmplx: COMPLEX): COMPLEX;
PROCEDURE polarToComplex(abs, arg: REAL): COMPLEX;
PROCEDURE sqrt(cmplx: COMPLEX): COMPLEX;
END ComplexMath.
with obvious extension to LongComplexMath. This is
due to Rick Sutcliffe (Rick_Sutcliffe@cc.sfu.ca)
at Trinity Western University.
The only Modula-2 compiler I know of to support
this is the Unix one by EPC in Edinburgh. They pulled
in their treatment of complex from their Pascal-E
compiler and it just happened that they got close
to what has been proposed for the standard. They
point out that they don't have the library yet,
but they would add one if someone can tell them
excatly what the final definition is going to be.
They also have other features of the draft Standard:
multi-dimensional open-arrays, extended definition
of VAL, and module clean-up.
Their compilers are available for most Unix systems.
At any rate, you can contact them at any of the following:-
in Europe in USA and North America
EPC MSS Ltd.
17 Alva Street 2107 North First Street
Edinburgh Suite 600
EH2 4PH San Jose CA95131
Scotland USA
UK
Tel: (+44) 31 225 6262 Tel: 408 452 0527
Fax: (+44) 31 225 6644 Fax: 408 452 0686
Email: support@epc.ed.ac.uk