From owner-sc22wg5+sc22wg5-dom8=www.open-std.org@open-std.org Wed Mar 14 12:56:50 2012 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 776D59DB118; Wed, 14 Mar 2012 12:56:50 +0100 (CET) Delivered-To: sc22wg5@open-std.org X-Greylist: delayed 597 seconds by postgrey-1.34 at www5.open-std.org; Wed, 14 Mar 2012 12:56:49 CET Received: from mk-filter-4-a-1.mail.uk.tiscali.com (mk-filter-4-a-1.mail.tiscali.co.uk [212.74.100.55]) by www.open-std.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C634C9DB112 for ; Wed, 14 Mar 2012 12:56:49 +0100 (CET) X-Trace: 732840546/mk-filter-4.mail.uk.tiscali.com/B2C/$b2c-THROTTLED-DYNAMIC/b2c-CUSTOMER-DYNAMIC-IP/88.104.245.94/None/d.muxworthy@bcs.org.uk X-SBRS: None X-RemoteIP: 88.104.245.94 X-IP-MAIL-FROM: d.muxworthy@bcs.org.uk X-SMTP-AUTH: X-Originating-Country: GB/UNITED KINGDOM X-MUA: Apple Mail (2.1251.1) X-IP-BHB: Once X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: ApIBAMmDYE9YaPVe/2dsb2JhbAAMN7kyBwEBAQMBOkQLC0ZXhWEHgjasDZAqjVyCP2MEmy6KUIJm X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.73,583,1325462400"; d="scan'208";a="732840546" Received: from 88-104-245-94.dynamic.dsl.as9105.com (HELO [192.168.1.2]) ([88.104.245.94]) by smtp.tiscali.co.uk with ESMTP; 14 Mar 2012 11:46:51 +0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1251.1) Subject: Re: (SC22WG5.4635) Part 2 of the standard From: David Muxworthy In-Reply-To: <20120313200407.EBAB39DB112@www.open-std.org> Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2012 11:46:50 +0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <20120313200407.EBAB39DB112@www.open-std.org> To: sc22wg5@open-std.org X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1251.1) Sender: owner-sc22wg5@open-std.org Precedence: bulk On 13 Mar 2012 John Reid wrote: > I promised at Garching to look into the conversion to Fortran 2003 of = the procedures of the varying length strings module that are not = included in Part 1 of the Standard. These are the I/O procedures GET, = PUT and PUT_LINE and the substring manipulation procedures EXTRACT, = INSERT, REMOVE, REPLACE, and INSERT. This was undertaken in the context that provision of an updated module = would allow withdrawal of the standard. Since then we have had the = results of the systematic review of the standard (11 confirm, 2 = stabilize, 19 abstain) so formally the standard is confirmed until the = next review in 2016. The review also showed that a surprising number of countries (7) have = national standards identical to the ISO one and five answered 'yes' to: = "Is this International Standard used in your country without national = adoption or are products used in your country based on this standard?". It would seem best for WG5 to do nothing more for the time being. David=