From owner-sc22wg5+sc22wg5-dom8=www.open-std.org@open-std.org Fri Sep 30 14:51:13 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sc22wg5-dom8 Delivered-To: sc22wg5-dom8@www.open-std.org Received: by www.open-std.org (Postfix, from userid 521) id 083B93568E1; Fri, 30 Sep 2011 14:51:13 +0200 (CEST) Delivered-To: sc22wg5@open-std.org Received: from exprod6og105.obsmtp.com (exprod6og105.obsmtp.com [64.18.1.189]) by www.open-std.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E8477356828 for ; Fri, 30 Sep 2011 14:51:08 +0200 (CEST) Received: from cfexcas01.americas.cray.com ([136.162.34.12]) (using TLSv1) by exprod6ob105.postini.com ([64.18.5.12]) with SMTP ID DSNKToW7NshIes/w1WaB2gY5njgmnrzysX3s@postini.com; Fri, 30 Sep 2011 05:51:12 PDT Received: from CFWEX01.americas.cray.com (172.30.88.25) by cfexcas01.americas.cray.com (172.30.74.222) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.3.192.1; Fri, 30 Sep 2011 07:51:01 -0500 Received: from fortran.us.cray.com (172.31.19.200) by CFWEX01.americas.cray.com (172.30.88.25) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.339.1; Fri, 30 Sep 2011 07:51:00 -0500 Message-ID: <4E85BB40.3000907@cray.com> Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2011 07:51:12 -0500 From: Bill Long Reply-To: Organization: Cray Inc. User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; rv:6.0.2) Gecko/20110902 Thunderbird/6.0.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: fortran standards email list for J3 CC: David Muxworthy , "sc22wg5@open-std.org" Subject: Re: (j3.2006) (SC22WG5.4544) Comments on the technical content of the coarray TS References: <20110928104528.40F3C3568E7@www.open-std.org> <20110930113900.C09F63568CA@www.open-std.org> In-Reply-To: <20110930113900.C09F63568CA@www.open-std.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-sc22wg5@open-std.org Precedence: bulk My recollection was a bit less severe, though perhaps ending at the same point. My understanding is that any feature that goes into the final TS needs to have justification included in the proposal, including features currently in N1858. Of course, there has already been some amount of work on those features, so they would be likely suspects, though perhaps in modified form given subsequent experience. Some could be scrapped, and others added. I think an important question that needs to be decided is whether the goal of the TS is to include only those features that are already in demand (from users) or that users through (having failed to carefully read f2008) were already standardized, leaving more general expansion to the next revision, or whether the TS should be a comprehensive extension of coarrays that would unlikely be modified in the next standard. I would argue that the current TS draft is somewhere between these tow options. Going with the minimal TS would allow for quicker completion and sooner start on f201x. The larger version would possibly result in better long-term integration of the feature. At this point, my personal preference is for the minimal approach. Cheers, Bill On 9/30/11 6:39 AM, David Muxworthy wrote: > On 28 Sep 2011, at 11:37, John Reid wrote: > >> Would anyone else like to comment? I will be talking about this at the >> BCS Fortran Group AGM tomorrow and hope to solicit some comments to >> add. > > > and on 28 Sep 2011, at 12:10, N.M. Maclaren wrote: > >> I have rechecked the WG5 Garching minutes and, while we did not >> formally agree to Reinhold's point (2), I recall there being a >> consensus that it was a necessary step within J3. > > > As author of the minutes and resolutions, I have to admit that they > are pretty minimal. However my recollection of the discussion at the > WG5 meeting was that N1858 was to be shredded, annihilated, trashed, > 100% forgotten about and that we would start again from scratch by > first asking anew for user requirements, then producing an Objectives > and Rationale document and only thirdly specifying syntax and > semantics. I was surprised then at the BCS Fortran Group AGM when the > discussion seemed to imply that the coarray TS would essentially be > N1858 with variations. > > Perhaps others at the meeting could confirm or contradict my > impression. > David > > _______________________________________________ > J3 mailing list > J3@j3-fortran.org > http://j3-fortran.org/mailman/listinfo/j3 -- Bill Long longb@cray.com Fortran Technical Support & voice: 651-605-9024 Bioinformatics Software Development fax: 651-605-9142 Cray Inc./Cray Plaza, Suite 210/380 Jackson St./St. Paul, MN 55101