From Z3000TT@AWITUW01.BITNET Fri Nov 15 19:08:14 1991 Received: from danpost2.uni-c.dk by dkuug.dk via EUnet with SMTP (5.64+/8+bit/IDA-1.2.8) id AA29661; Fri, 15 Nov 91 19:08:14 +0100 Received: from vm.uni-c.dk by danpost2.uni-c.dk (5.65/1.34) id AA08465; Fri, 15 Nov 91 18:08:18 GMT Received: from vm.uni-c.dk by vm.uni-c.dk (IBM VM SMTP V2R1) with BSMTP id 7578; Fri, 15 Nov 91 19:08:41 DNT Received: from awituw01.bitnet (Z3000TT) by vm.uni-c.dk (Mailer R2.07) with BSMTP id 6786; Fri, 15 Nov 91 19:08:40 DNT Message-Id: <$468927632S0404D19911115T180628.0001.Mail-VE> To: SC22WG5@dkuug.dk From: Z3000TT@AWITUW01.BITNET Subject: Attn: ( - from AWITUW01) Date: 15 NOV 91 19:06:28 X-Charset: ASCII X-Char-Esc: 29 Automatic distribution list SC22WG5 Text is sent for ( - from AWITUW01) Document number is 306 No comment provided ================== Start of message forwarded ============= Subject: WG5 Ballot on String Module From: :$SYSTEM.$NON_MAILVE_SYSTEM Date Sent: 11/15/91 19:05:41 ----------------------------------------------------------- Return-path: Received: from awituw01.bitnet by awituw01.bitnet with BSMTP; 15 Nov 91 19:05:39 +0100 Received: from DKAUNI2 (MAILER) by awituw01.bitnet for via BIT with NTF id MAILER_MAIL; 15 Nov 91 19:05:33 +0100 Message-ID: <"91-11-15-19:02:28.98*AE38"@DKAUNI2.BITNET> Date: Fri, 15 Nov 91 19:02 From: "Wolfgang Walter" To: SC22WG5@AWITUW01.BITNET Subject: WG5 Ballot on String Module Do you approve WG5 - N743 for submission to the SC22 Secretariat for registration as a committee draft (CD)? My vote is YES. Reasons: ------- 1. The new work item ISO 1539-1 for varying-length character strings was deliberately opened (more than 2 years ago) to provide some very fundamental functionality in the area of character string and text handling which could have been, but is not provided by the F90 standard itself. The current proposal undeniably provides this functionality and is desperately needed as soon as possible - especially in view of the availability of at least one F90 compiler on the market. The later this module is standardized, the more different versions of similar string handling facilities will be implemented by individuals, thus destroying compatibility and portability of these features. (We are already writing F90 programs which use and need the string module. These are NUMERICAL applications, not word processing or others!!!) 2. The "Rationale" N744 provided with this ballot makes the current options very clear, and it is obvious that a standard module is by far the best solution (option 1), especially if the collateral standard is adopted as soon as possible. 3. The overall scope of the module has been clearly defined and is well adhered to by the current proposal. 4. The string module provides fundamental tools which are useful in virtually any application program, for example because they improve the ways in which the user can communicate with his or her program, and the program with him or her. F90 has taken the step from static, fixed size arrays to dynamic arrays. Dynamic character string handling is just as important and fundamental, and conceptually very similar. Comments: -------- 1. I agree with many of John Reid's comments. However, I fail to see how these led him to reject the current proposal. None of these issues seems to be very serious or require much time to take into consideration. 2. There is a fairly substantial number of typographical errors and a lot of "inhomogeneous wording" in the current document. We certainly need to do some careful proofreading. 3. Examples of necessary global changes are: a. preceed... -> precede... b. occurance -> occurrence 4. Some comments in the module code are very difficult to read, especially when the names of arguments (and other entities) appear in the text without any visual distinction. I propose to enclose such names (which appear in the F90 code itself) in (double?) quotes for better legibility. Wolfgang Walter Karlsruhe, 14 November, 1991