From owner-sc22wg5+sc22wg5-dom8=www.open-std.org@open-std.org Fri Dec 12 01:44:16 2014 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 0D8B93585D2; Fri, 12 Dec 2014 01:44:15 +0100 (CET) Delivered-To: sc22wg5@open-std.org Received: from nag-j.co.jp (nag-j.co.jp [111.68.142.10]) by www.open-std.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1FAFA3568C4 for ; Fri, 12 Dec 2014 01:44:12 +0100 (CET) Received: from Maru6 (218-42-159-105.cust.bit-drive.ne.jp [218.42.159.105]) (authenticated bits=0) by nag-j.co.jp (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id sBC0iFoE049359 for ; Fri, 12 Dec 2014 09:44:18 +0900 (JST) (envelope-from malcolm@nag-j.co.jp) Message-ID: From: "Malcolm Cohen" To: "WG5" References: <20141108182113.6EC5E3581CE@www.open-std.org><20141207195158.20EE0358488@www.open-std.org><0EF5DA3D-6652-44A7-8859-70A05437D64B@rouson.net><20141211194904.B2BAC3581C3@www.open-std.org><20141211204955.62B6D358705@www.open-std.org> <60091BBC-B90A-4BEB-86BC-591E708C0AA1@cray.com> In-Reply-To: <60091BBC-B90A-4BEB-86BC-591E708C0AA1@cray.com> Subject: Re: (j3.2006) (SC22WG5.5397) [ukfortran] Straw vote on draft DTS Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2014 09:44:10 +0900 Organization: =?UTF-8?B?5pel5pysTkFH?= MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="UTF-8"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Importance: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Windows Live Mail 15.4.3555.308 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V15.4.3555.308 Sender: owner-sc22wg5@open-std.org Precedence: bulk > On Dec 11 2014, Van Snyder wrote: >> >> If the provision in the Introduction that "the semantics and syntax >> specified by this Technical Specification be included in the next >> revision of ISO/IEC 1539-1 without change" were removed, or the caveat Bill Long replies: <<< Except that Van left out the words coming after “without change” : “unless experience in the implementation and use of this feature identifies errors that need to be corrected”. There is more than ample flexibility to “fix” any actual problems during integration into F2015. >>> There is sufficient (*not* "more than ample"!) flexibility. But the schedule will be blown out of the water if we are going to wait for experience in the implementation and use of the feature. Neither the "[likelihood of an] avalanche of interps" nor "delay for another 4 years" options look particularly appealing. Cheers, -- ................................Malcolm Cohen, Nihon NAG, Tokyo.