From owner-sc22wg5+sc22wg5-dom8=www.open-std.org@open-std.org Thu Jul 7 20:49:54 2016 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 E30B79DB161; Thu, 7 Jul 2016 20:49:53 +0200 (CEST) Delivered-To: sc22wg5@open-std.org Received: from mga02.intel.com (mga02.intel.com [134.134.136.20]) by www.open-std.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9D4FC35723B for ; Thu, 7 Jul 2016 20:49:45 +0200 (CEST) Received: from orsmga003.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.27]) by orsmga101.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 07 Jul 2016 11:49:42 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.28,324,1464678000"; d="scan'208";a="842324357" Received: from orsmsx107.amr.corp.intel.com ([10.22.240.5]) by orsmga003.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 07 Jul 2016 11:49:42 -0700 Received: from orsmsx112.amr.corp.intel.com (10.22.240.13) by ORSMSX107.amr.corp.intel.com (10.22.240.5) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.248.2; Thu, 7 Jul 2016 11:49:41 -0700 Received: from orsmsx103.amr.corp.intel.com ([169.254.5.146]) by ORSMSX112.amr.corp.intel.com ([169.254.3.162]) with mapi id 14.03.0248.002; Thu, 7 Jul 2016 11:49:41 -0700 From: "Whitlock, Stan" To: WG5 Subject: RE: (j3.2006) (SC22WG5.5755) RE: Units of measure Thread-Topic: (j3.2006) (SC22WG5.5755) RE: Units of measure Thread-Index: AQHR1+fJMHCUiyfbBkuoEA+Eq/M16qANS34w Date: Thu, 7 Jul 2016 18:49:40 +0000 Message-ID: <4AA982B1265F43408480F737BE12F4D36FC5CBA8@ORSMSX103.amr.corp.intel.com> References: <20160619135920.D0F3F358287@www.open-std.org> <20160629112043.BF09F3587AF@www.open-std.org> <20160629123517.185A635828D@www.open-std.org> <20160629190123.72A8035859B@www.open-std.org> <20160702105054.18596358745@www.open-std.org> <20160702202059.B9618358745@www.open-std.org> <20160703085848.B63663584A2@www.open-std.org> <20160705153207.E49A9358343@www.open-std.org> <20160705173722.4977735852E@www.open-std.org> <20160706152553.105A89DB160@www.open-std.org> <20160706164712.D056F9DB160@www.open-std.org> <1467851790.3820.152.camel@vanlap.vsnyder> In-Reply-To: <1467851790.3820.152.camel@vanlap.vsnyder> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-titus-metadata-40: eyJDYXRlZ29yeUxhYmVscyI6IiIsIk1ldGFkYXRhIjp7Im5zIjoiaHR0cDpcL1wvd3d3LnRpdHVzLmNvbVwvbnNcL0ludGVsMyIsImlkIjoiNzM5MDBjNmYtZmFmZC00NDc3LWE4YTgtZjg3MGMxNjY3MjBiIiwicHJvcHMiOlt7Im4iOiJDVFBDbGFzc2lmaWNhdGlvbiIsInZhbHMiOlt7InZhbHVlIjoiQ1RQX0lDIn1dfV19LCJTdWJqZWN0TGFiZWxzIjpbXSwiVE1DVmVyc2lvbiI6IjE1LjkuNi42IiwiVHJ1c3RlZExhYmVsSGFzaCI6IjNNTytKVzJaeWF2MDBUdVJVbElOS0NxdnowSHFYUlJyUFluZUtkZjVyMHM9In0= x-ctpclassification: CTP_IC x-originating-ip: [10.22.254.140] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: owner-sc22wg5@open-std.org Precedence: bulk You say: If your organization had lost $300 million due to a trivial software mistak= e that the programming language and its runtime could have caught or correc= ted automatically, would you roll over and play dead? If you wasted two wo= rk weeks per year chasing problems that the programming language and its ru= ntime could have caught or corrected automatically, would you roll over and= play dead? and: even though essentially no code generation is involved, and what little is = required is trivial. It could be done by the front end, by the equivalent = of inlining trivial one-line functions, long before the real code generator= gets involved. My questions are: 1. How many people got fired because of this screw-up that crashed the Mar= s spacecraft? How much lost taxpayer money was recovered as damages from t= hose responsible? 2. What has NASA done since this disaster to lessen the problem impact? Y= ou still spend 2 weeks per year chasing mismatched units? Have mismatched = units caused any other disasters? Or has NASA eliminated the problem? 3. You implied that JPL has an absolute lock on reliability requirements. = If providing units checking is so trivial and so important, why hasn't JPL= built or contracted to be built such a checker? /Stan -----Original Message----- From: j3-bounces@mailman.j3-fortran.org [mailto:j3-bounces@mailman.j3-fortr= an.org] On Behalf Of Van Snyder Sent: Wednesday, July 06, 2016 8:37 PM To: j3@mailman.j3-fortran.org Subject: Re: (j3.2006) (SC22WG5.5755) RE: Units of measure On Wed, 2016-07-06 at 16:35 +0000, Lionel, Steve wrote: > I didn't like the particular proposal, that it felt "too F77-like" and=20 > I didn't think it would solve the stated problem, but I don't remember=20 > details. In 2004, there were two who didn't like the proposal, eight who liked it, a= nd three who loved it. Nobody said then why they didn't like it, and other= than the vague "too F77 like" nobody has yet offered a reason for not liki= ng it. It's difficult to revise a proposal to answer objections that nobod= y will reveal. That was supposed to be the purpose of N2112, but it's quit= e vague also. Even though the sentiment was 11-2 favorable, somehow it got assessed to be= as big a project as coarrays, even though essentially no code generation i= s involved, and what little is required is trivial. It could be done by th= e front end, by the equivalent of inlining trivial one-line functions, long= before the real code generator gets involved. I'm curious what's "F77 like" about an attribute for a real variable. It was designed explicitly to solve the stated problem, so I'm curious to k= now why it wouldn't. The TS proposal, with all its details, is online. It contains 14 pages of = editorial changes. The TS on ADDITIONAL features for coarrays contained 23= pages of editorial changes. The TS on ADDITIONAL features for C interoper= ability contained 21 pages of editorial changes. If your organization had lost $300 million due to a trivial software mistak= e that the programming language and its runtime could have caught or correc= ted automatically, would you roll over and play dead? If you wasted two wo= rk weeks per year chasing problems that the programming language and its ru= ntime could have caught or corrected automatically, would you roll over and= play dead? _______________________________________________ J3 mailing list J3@mailman.j3-fortran.org http://mailman.j3-fortran.org/mailman/listinfo/j3