rowan@convexc.UUCP (02/13/88)
FORTRAN 8x evolution or a new language? We have seen several notes pass through this group in the past weeks talking about FORTRAN 8x and its relative strengths and weeknesses. This is good because I do not feel the standard is getting the wide distribution that a proposal that effects this many people should. I encourage everyone who uses FORTRAN or a regular basis to learn as much as possible about the proposed new language. I posted a copy of the overview section of the standards Forward last week. I wish there was some way the entire text of the draft proposed standard could be made available to a wider audience. Unfortunately, ANSI is more interested in getting $50 for each copy of the document than seeing that the needs of the FORTRAN community are served. As Kurt Hirchert points out that is the mandate from ANSI and not the wishes of the technical committee, X3J3, the people that put in the long hard hours to produce the draft proposed standard. This has become an emotional issue here on the net as many do. What I ask you to consider is, if people like Kurt, Kent Paul Dolan, Robert Paul Colbert and others are willing to spend so much time researching the issues and writting notes on this subject, doesn't it make sense to look into the issue yourself? The cut off date for comments is February 23rd. The face of FORTRAN will be changed forever if this proposal is adopted. Are you sure FORTRAN 8x is the language you want to be programming in in the late 1990's? Kent Dolan states > I have no trouble with someone taking a gun to FORTRAN and > saying "Bang, you're dead"; I just don't think it will happen. > Letting the language linger on, looking like a viable > language, continuing to be taught by FORTRAN using professors > to unsuspecting engineering majors, costing probably billions > in excessive maintenance costs due to problems which can be > remedied only by such radical surgery as proposed by the > committee, to this I do object. The problem is not that > FORTRAN is dying, the problem is that FORTRAN is not dying, > but it is bleeding us white. If I believed that, FORTRAN would die and everyone using FORTRAN today would be using Ada. Unfortunately that is not the case. The language X3J3 has developed is a new language. I should know I served on the committee off and on for six years with two different employers. It is more complicated than Ada because in addition to all of Ada features (except tasking and exception handlers) it contains all of the worst features of FORTRAN 77 like insignificant blanks, multiple ENTRY points and alternate RETURNs. The job of the committee was to standardize existing practice, not design a new language. Another one of my real problems with draft proposed standard is the committees insistence on inventing new syntax when reasonable constructs exist in other languages. When internal procedures were proposed, the obvious place to define internal procedures was at the beginning of the program unit. That was proposal was defeated because it looked too much like Pascal. More than once at X3J3 meetings the statement was made, "We can't use that syntax, its not FORTRAN-like". Hence, internal procedures in 8x are defined at the end program units. I don't know about you but, I am still a fan of the concept of `defined before used'. Did you also notice that procedures cannot be nested? Surprising isn't it? FORTRAN's program unit structure used to be flat, now it is two-tiered. The list goes on and on. Another question I would like to pose to users is, what do you really want compiler vendors spending their time implementing? If more efficient object code or faster compilation times are not important, then the fact that all the best FORTRAN compiler writers will be writing a new compilers from the ground up for the next five to ten years will not bother you. Statements that 8x can be added to existing FORTRAN compilers with little trouble were not made by anyone who has ever written a FORTRAN compiler, let alone an Ada or 8x compiler. Again, let me urge you to learn as much about FORTRAN 8x. I will be posting a series of small notes on specific features of the new language. I will try to present the constructs fairly but draw your own conclusions. I will for the most part take examples from the draft proposed standard. If you like a new feature let the committee know that too. A lot of hard work has gone into this effort. Now is time for the user community to add its input to the process. Letters must be mailed by February 23 to: X3 Secretariat CBEMA 311 First Street NW, Suite 500 Washington, DC 20001-2178 Steve Rowan Convex Computer Corp. {allegra,ihnp4,uiucdcs}!convex!rowan (214)952-0332