From pichon@obspm.fr  Tue May 20 18:30:57 1997
Received: from mesiob.obspm.fr (mesiob.obspm.fr [145.238.2.2]) by dkuug.dk (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id SAA02100 for <sc22wg5@dkuug.dk>; Tue, 20 May 1997 18:30:55 +0200
Received: from pichon1.obspm.fr by MESIOB.OBSPM.FR (PMDF V4.2-14 #2584) id
 <01IJ3P9TCIEO00B8QS@MESIOB.OBSPM.FR>; Tue, 20 May 1997 18:36:14 +2
Date: Tue, 20 May 1997 18:30:26 +0200
From: Bernard PICHON <pichon@obspm.fr>
Subject: Re: Happy endian?
To: sc22wg5@dkuug.dk
Message-id: <01IJ3P9TCO2A00B8QS@MESIOB.OBSPM.FR>
MIME-version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet Mail 4.70.1157
Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN
Content-transfer-encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3

Leonard J. Moss <ljm@slac.stanford.edu> a =E9crit dans
l'article
<ljm-ya02408000R1605971002460001@slac-news.stanford.edu>...
> In article <01bc6208$b60088c0$1c12ee91@pichon>, "Bernard
PICHON"
> <pichon@obspm.fr> wrote:
> > [ from an another mail ]
> > > OF COURSE, TO BE COMPLETELY STANDARD CONFORMING ON
EVERY=20
> > > PROCESSOR, EVERYTHING SHOULD BE IN UPPER CASE.)
> >
> > FALSE : lowercase are F90-conforming.          BP
>
> This is one of those hair-splitting distinctions.  The
actual wording of
> the F90 standard specifies that accepting lowercase is a
processor option,
> but if it _is_ accepted it _must_ be treated in a case
insensitive manner.=20
> Thus this is one of those "processor dependent" gray
areas where a program
> that is arguably "standard conforming" could, in
principal, be rejected by
> a processor that is also, arguably,
"standard-conforming".  (This is not
> unlike the escape clause that permits a processor to
reject an otherwise
> standard-conforming program that is "too complex".)=20
Fortunately, this
> issue is moot since probably all F90 processors accept
lowercase.

I disagree with you :=20
In the actual version of F90 (as published) the wording is
:=20

At Section 3 : Characters, lexical tokens and source form,
   3.1 Processor character set
   3.1.1 Letters=20
`` If a processor also permits lower case letters, the
lower case letters are
equivalent to the corresponding upper case letters in
program unit except
in a character context (3.3)''

Nowadays, the processors permit lower case letters (the
punching devices and=20
so on are very seldom) and, thus lower case letters are
really equivalent to=20
upper case letters.=20

Any other comments from the WG5 ????   =20
                                                   Bernard
PICHON
                            =20