From jwagener@amoco.com Mon Jun 27 03:58:36 1994 Received: from interlock.amoco.com by dkuug.dk with SMTP id AA09754 (5.65c8/IDA-1.4.4j for ); Mon, 27 Jun 1994 15:53:36 +0200 Received: by interlock.amoco.com id AA12886 (InterLock SMTP Gateway 1.1 for sc22wg5@dkuug.dk); Mon, 27 Jun 1994 08:53:28 -0500 Received: by interlock.amoco.com (Internal Mail Agent-3); Mon, 27 Jun 1994 08:53:28 -0500 Received: by interlock.amoco.com (Internal Mail Agent-2); Mon, 27 Jun 1994 08:53:28 -0500 Received: by interlock.amoco.com (Internal Mail Agent-1); Mon, 27 Jun 1994 08:53:28 -0500 From: jwagener@amoco.com X-Openmail-Hops: 1 Date: Mon, 27 Jun 94 08:58:36 -0500 Message-Id: Subject: IRTF, X3H5, etc. To: sc22wg5@dkuug.dk X-Charset: ASCII X-Char-Esc: 29 Item Subject: Message text Two matters, which turn out to be somewhat related, have arisen which require X3J3 action. Since both have international implications, this note is being distributed to the sc22wg5 mail list for the widest possible input/comment. One of the issues, IRTF, requires an X3J3 TAG letter ballot, which I will distribute at the end of the week; the other issue, an X3H5-related request from X3, requires X3J3 action at the next meeting. IRTF stands for Industrial Real Time Fortran, and is an international standard, IS 7846, that "specifies a tasking model and a set of related routines to allow control of multi-tasking systems". It is a Fortran 77 callable procedure library, comprising 26 subroutines and 3 functions. Roughly speaking, these procedures allow tasks to be scheduled, descheduled, started, suspended, canceled, and synchronized. The last of these is handled by various locks involving semaphores, events, eventmarks, and resourcemarks. SC22 needs to determine whether to confirm, revise, or withdraw this standard; the US SC22 TAG has asked the X3J3 TAG for a recommendation. I'm not sure, but I believe SC22 also expects some counsel from WG5 on this issue. Clearly, much of the X3H5 work deals with some of the same concepts. X3 has asked X3J3 to "consider assuming responsibility for the Fortran 90 Binding Project that currently belongs to X3H5". At the May X3/OMC meeting I was alerted to the prospect that we might receive such a request, and commented at that time that we would likely accept such responsibility only if WG5 (a) makes this a requirement for the international Fortran community (possibly as a new work item) and (b) assigns the development responsibility to X3J3. I will put the X3 request letter into the X3J3 premeeting distribution; with that, and with results from the WG5 meeting the preceding week, we should be able to formulate a response to X3 after the next X3J3 meeting. Jerry