From owner-sc22wg5@open-std.org Tue Dec 9 07:30:36 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sc22wg5-dom7 Delivered-To: sc22wg5-dom7@www2.open-std.org Received: by www2.open-std.org (Postfix, from userid 521) id 34A54CA5FE0; Tue, 9 Dec 2008 07:30:36 +0100 (CET) X-Original-To: sc22wg5@open-std.org Delivered-To: sc22wg5@open-std.org Received: from smtp.llnl.gov (nspiron-3.llnl.gov [128.115.41.83]) by www2.open-std.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 69EA7CA343D for ; Tue, 9 Dec 2008 07:30:33 +0100 (CET) X-Attachments: None Received: from vpna-user-128-15-244-34.llnl.gov (HELO [128.15.244.34]) ([128.15.244.34]) by smtp.llnl.gov with ESMTP; 08 Dec 2008 22:30:32 -0800 Message-ID: <493E1088.20001@llnl.gov> Date: Mon, 08 Dec 2008 22:30:32 -0800 From: Aleksandar Donev User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.8.1.8) Gecko/20071009 SeaMonkey/1.1.5 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: sc22wg5@open-std.org Subject: Re: (j3.2006) (SC22WG5.3778) Ballot on the technical content of the TR References: <20081127193527.EF00DC178D9@www2.open-std.org> <20081208024650.76234C4596C@www2.open-std.org> <20081208154207.B50ABC178E0@www2.open-std.org> <493DDCA3.3050104@sun.com> <20081209044540.E9F0AC178E5@www2.open-std.org> <493E0084.1020206@sun.com> In-Reply-To: <493E0084.1020206@sun.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-sc22wg5@open-std.org Precedence: bulk Robert Corbett wrote: > I understand that. I also understand the advantage the proposal will > give to vendors who already use the knew capabilities. I don't like > Sun being put at a disadvantage relative to those vendors. Sun (and NAG, and whoever else does not store rank/type info in their descriptors), were not singled out to be "disadvantaged" intentionally nor even by accident (there were lengthy discussions over the rank/type issue). Neither was IBM for passing OPTIONAL arguments differently from others. Is it a better alternative to put everyone at a disadvantage, i.e., force everyone to implement something utterly new, unused by anyone at present, thing (as an example, read Nick's proposal), that is actually less handy for users??? Also, note that those vendors that carry around info in their descriptors already did some extra work to add that to their compiler infrastructure. Finally, without the rank/type in a descriptor assumed-type and rank dummies become useless. It seemed they were in fact everyone's favorite, probably because everyone has desired them at some point in Fortran usage. Of course, we can add 3^3 different types of descriptors, one for assumed-shape, one for assumed-type, etc., and combinations thereof, but you will still not to implement it so why not simplify the TR to begin with? Best, Aleks