From owner-sc22wg5+sc22wg5-dom9=www.open-std.org@open-std.org Tue Aug 11 15:37:18 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sc22wg5-dom9 Delivered-To: sc22wg5-dom9@www.open-std.org Received: by www.open-std.org (Postfix, from userid 521) id 8444C358290; Tue, 11 Aug 2020 15:37:18 +0200 (CEST) Delivered-To: sc22wg5@open-std.org Received: from mail-lj1-f169.google.com (mail-lj1-f169.google.com [209.85.208.169]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by www.open-std.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 38CB53571D3 for ; Tue, 11 Aug 2020 15:37:18 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail-lj1-f169.google.com with SMTP id g6so13506477ljn.11 for ; Tue, 11 Aug 2020 06:37:18 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=CyaVnq4TyaFS+1rHZQpXCuU6cYBfqg2NaLHtig9+sc0=; b=gPPx/kuvGicsO5uKBmtEXuH9sBEahSfwJ1QcWHqVTZUnS50cPJlW1D57M7qj65d6Ix cLagTgYY5rDNn+QJxWk+BNyn4TEtEOiGrMyUBK+zxbHrm2W8oZbIiAft6w6IklVGUGtP ZVyyrZIxeeF5cB4exTgHkDoKuSH9igVRx3QqGBCBO1QYshvfVU6U/HDId/1AOF+BGscE GEhI+csEm/dlW31y/wYUHNXr3pkx1B+ulxN2AN/OOnTvcbRo8b34Lo+VBBHLb8WoMcLT poXPTUFjRkC3W6MBdrOw8leaA5gLiuxyed8+sPA2/0XODK2+M8M0gZdLWsfkFB56nYv4 KGng== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=CyaVnq4TyaFS+1rHZQpXCuU6cYBfqg2NaLHtig9+sc0=; b=jrsGZQWFPHIEry9WmgXI0P5WS0u1tHwCAp1QZba8zyf1/N5x2pjrvcPR2qPfs40EOr qnuJcGg3GsoxYTf0FT9w80ascLsQQ1rpXBk0WmjlPJ7aRrYgXusAqry0YHKVXzrY7fxL 6bm1Mmzfj5so8D2zc5CcCh5fwiBCfGjAI2hiCwDayevXukx9c1d9f2ZQSdhbcaZBlShI ePrrVPeOLqgnG5qB92ezsXVDqiMkIbk/BcDwbr+cr6FUuXd5jFcO/PhHRDQTG2WNXytL my4UBhFJMgc+cYweut9V+ag+ste560vFpp85T9l76HetJZWSKLfHRJawyQWsl1k2RIVW U1EQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533CjLbaRC2rg02RtmEvKNTYVDE3AGbdMg0hyUWnIHkW0ZsjLEDN cDZSnw3gX/NGt2TRUVxHmmq3Rn6z3iq4/3tvctY4eQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxlpef3f7kXG3uoHYZwJrw+RKAiuELadyR1NdQHv3ih5mT0HuiT+uYVshzLKeQI0jLync2FL6DGU4emCZSF8iQ= X-Received: by 2002:a05:651c:503:: with SMTP id o3mr3255262ljp.312.1597153037000; Tue, 11 Aug 2020 06:37:17 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20200810230020.B9227357216@www.open-std.org> <20200811030137.155A5358343@www.open-std.org> <20200811073657.79C53358993@www.open-std.org> <20200811082510.4B4E1358993@www.open-std.org> <20200811083603.7E5AA358290@www.open-std.org> <98A1F99A-ED27-4BD8-924D-2E6EF3178464@att.net> <20200811091516.9E627358290@www.open-std.org> <20200811094418.E415E358290@www.open-std.org> <20200811110038.45B34358290@www.open-std.org> In-Reply-To: <20200811110038.45B34358290@www.open-std.org> From: Dick Hendrickson Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2020 08:37:05 -0500 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [J3] (SC22WG5.6273) RE: [ukfortran] Fortran 90 and BOZ literals To: WG5 List Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000006c25f305ac9a2bbb" Sender: owner-sc22wg5@open-std.org Precedence: bulk --0000000000006c25f305ac9a2bbb Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" I have an HTML copy that has Steve's missing BOZ lines in it. I could e-mail a copy to someone . Dick Hendrickson On Tue, Aug 11, 2020 at 6:00 AM Malcolm Cohen via J3 < j3@mailman.j3-fortran.org> wrote: > BTW, Fortran 90 (1991) predates PDF (1993), so whatever N692 is is > someone's attempt at a fixup. > > (And it's not groff - groff only appeared in 1990, a bit late for > typesetting a document we were working on several years prior. According to > Wikipedia, the "first stable version" of groff was November 1991, several > months after publication.) > > If I recall correctly, the Fortran 90 standard was typeset using > Sun-proprietary macros (and possible Sun-proprietary troff technology). > Furthermore, due to the use of proprietary technology, (again IIRC) that > troff source code was not supplied to other committee members. The Fortran > 95 source started out with a Framemaker reincarnation of Fortran 90 (and I > recall it had some glitches from the conversion process). > > Unfortunately, the one person who really knew what happened, and thus > could explain the details properly, has recently passed away; that is, Walt > Brainerd. > > So w.r.t. the Fortran 90 standard, the "gold standard" is the published > document. In particular, there was no PDF. If someone sometime somehow > could scan a published copy in, that would be useful as a historical > document, but apart from personal or committee use, would doubtless be a > violation of ISO copyright. > > Cheers, > -- > ..............Malcolm Cohen, NAG Oxford/Tokyo. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Robert Corbett > Sent: Tuesday, August 11, 2020 6:44 PM > To: General J3 interest list > Cc: WG5 List > Subject: [ukfortran] (SC22WG5.6272) [J3] Fortran 90 and BOZ literals > > > > Sent from my iPhone > > > On Aug 11, 2020, at 2:14 AM, Shterenlikht, Anton via J3 < > j3@mailman.j3-fortran.org> wrote: > > > > > > > >> On 11 Aug 2020, at 09:59, Robert Corbett via J3 < > j3@mailman.j3-fortran.org> wrote: > >> > >> The file > >> > >> https://j3-fortran.org/doc/year/90/S8.115.pdf > >> > >> contains a late draft of the > >> Fortran 90 standard. I trust > >> it more than I trust the N692 > >> document. > > > > Interesting document. > > How close is it the published standard? > > There are lots of handwritten notes - did those made it to the > > published version? > > > > Just a few pages later, in 4.3.2.1 > > the 4 examples of nondefault character literal constants apper blank > > in N692, while they are present in S8.115.pdf > > > > Another glitch in N692 is in 4.3.2.1.1, last line before the numbered > > list, after: > > > > "For the default character type, the only constraints on the collating > sequence are:" > > > > there is: > > > > @.EQ delim $$ @.EN > > > > which is groff (or troff at that time?) gone bad - that groff command > > is meant to instruct groff to use the dollar sign as a delimiter for > > inline equation environment. > > But seems it was interepreted as a literal text. > > > > Perhaps somebody somewhere still has that g/troff src? > > If so, we can try to fix it and produce the correct Postscript/PDF. > > > > Anton > > > _______________________________________________ > ukfortran mailing list > https://lists.accu.org/mailman/listinfo/ukfortran > > --0000000000006c25f305ac9a2bbb Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I have an HTML copy that has Steve's missing BOZ = lines in it.=C2=A0 I could e-mail a copy to someone .

<= div>Dick Hendrickson

On Tue, Aug 11, 2020 at 6:00 AM Malcolm Cohen= via J3 <j3@mailman.j3-fort= ran.org> wrote:
BTW, Fortran 90 (1991) predates PDF (1993), so whatever N692 is is s= omeone's attempt at a fixup.

(And it's not groff - groff only appeared in 1990, a bit late for types= etting a document we were working on several years prior. According to Wiki= pedia, the "first stable version" of groff was November 1991, sev= eral months after publication.)

If I recall correctly, the Fortran 90 standard was typeset using Sun-propri= etary macros (and possible Sun-proprietary troff technology). Furthermore, = due to the use of proprietary technology, (again IIRC) that troff source co= de was not supplied to other committee members. The Fortran 95 source start= ed out with a Framemaker reincarnation of Fortran 90 (and I recall it had s= ome glitches from the conversion process).

Unfortunately, the one person who really knew what happened, and thus could= explain the details properly, has recently passed away; that is, Walt Brai= nerd.

So w.r.t. the Fortran 90 standard, the "gold standard" is the pub= lished document. In particular, there was no PDF. If someone sometime someh= ow could scan a published copy in, that would be useful as a historical doc= ument, but apart from personal or committee use, would doubtless be a viola= tion of ISO copyright.

Cheers,
--
..............Malcolm Cohen, NAG Oxford/Tokyo.

-----Original Message-----
From: Robert Corbett <rpcorbett@att.net>
Sent: Tuesday, August 11, 2020 6:44 PM
To: General J3 interest list <j3@mailman.j3-fortran.org>
Cc: WG5 List <= sc22wg5@open-std.org>
Subject: [ukfortran] (SC22WG5.6272) [J3] Fortran 90 and BOZ literals



Sent from my iPhone

> On Aug 11, 2020, at 2:14 AM, Shterenlikht, Anton via J3 <j3@mailman.j3-fortran.= org> wrote:
>
>
>
>> On 11 Aug 2020, at 09:59, Robert Corbett via J3 <j3@mailman.j3-fortran.org<= /a>> wrote:
>>
>> The file
>>
>> https://j3-fortran.org/doc/year/90/S8.115.pdf<= /a>
>>
>> contains a late draft of the
>> Fortran 90 standard.=C2=A0 I trust
>> it more than I trust the N692
>> document.
>
> Interesting document.
> How close is it the published standard?
> There are lots of handwritten notes - did those made it to the
> published version?
>
> Just a few pages later, in 4.3.2.1
> the 4 examples of nondefault character literal constants apper blank <= br> > in N692, while they are present in S8.115.pdf
>
> Another glitch in N692 is in 4.3.2.1.1, last line before the numbered =
> list, after:
>
> "For the default character type, the only constraints on the coll= ating sequence are:"
>
> there is:
>
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 @.EQ delim $$ @.EN
>
> which is groff (or troff at that time?) gone bad - that groff command =
> is meant to instruct groff to use the dollar sign as a delimiter for <= br> > inline equation environment.
> But seems it was interepreted as a literal text.
>
> Perhaps somebody somewhere still has that g/troff src?
> If so, we can try to fix it and produce the correct Postscript/PDF. >
> Anton


_______________________________________________
ukfortran mailing list
https://lists.accu.org/mailman/listinfo/ukfortran

--0000000000006c25f305ac9a2bbb--