From meissner@lynx.cs.usfca.edu Sun Mar 22 05:52:40 1992
Received: from lynx.cs.usfca.edu by dkuug.dk via EUnet with SMTP (5.64+/8+bit/IDA-1.2.8)
	id AA22663; Sun, 22 Mar 92 05:52:40 +0100
Received: by lynx.cs.usfca.edu (AIX 3.1/UCB 5.61/4.03)
          id AA23551; Sat, 21 Mar 92 20:50:16 -0800
Date: Sat, 21 Mar 92 20:50:16 -0800
From: meissner@lynx.cs.usfca.edu (Loren P. Meissner)
Message-Id: <9203220450.AA23551@lynx.cs.usfca.edu>
To: SC22WG5@dkuug.dk, bill@amber.ssd.csd.harris.com
Subject: Re:  (SC22WG5.83)  Re: Procedures comment by Psmith
X-Charset: ASCII
X-Char-Esc: 29

 My first message on "procedures" (referred to by JLW and others) was
a response to A. Tait: as I recall, he felt that the current WG5-L12
proposal was not good enough because it was based on procedures that
had failed us in the past.  I was trying to make the point that we
do not have much of an alternative so long as we stay within the current
ANSI-X3 and ISO structures.  The sort of changes that Andrew, Walt, and
I would like do not seem to be possible in this context.
 I am not really optimistic that we are going to change to a different
system, nor that we are going to get any procedures that we like better.
So we have to live with what we've got.
 All of this gets bogged down in one's view of "THE FORTRAN USER".  Bill
Leonard just used the term again.  We still do not know whether to count
megaflops or student homework assignments.  The latest suggestion is
one "user" per continent (africa, etc.).  Well -- the United Nations
has the same kind of problems.
-Loren Meissner