(j3.2006) POSIX

Michael Ingrassia michaeli
Thu Mar 29 20:41:42 EDT 2007

>The argument in favor of combining them into one standard
>is that they are intended to be one standard, and an implementation
>is supposed to comply with all of it, or not claim so.

Presumably this would prod some implementations to comply with more of the
parts, then, rather than give up claims of compliance, especially if the
bulk has already been implemented.

But I would hate to encourage new implementations of such old FORTRAN 77 style
bindings as are in POSIX when we are trying to peddle C Interop and newer

>On the CT22 mail list

Thanks for reporting on that, I'm not on that mail list.
Can J3 get engaged in the CT22 discussion to advocate making the
Fortran binding part optional until such time as it can be 
upgraded to modern Fortran style?   

	--Michael I.

More information about the J3 mailing list