(j3.2006) (SC22WG5.3782) Ballot on the technical content of the TR
Tue Dec 9 01:30:32 EST 2008
Robert Corbett wrote:
> I understand that. I also understand the advantage the proposal will
> give to vendors who already use the knew capabilities. I don't like
> Sun being put at a disadvantage relative to those vendors.
Sun (and NAG, and whoever else does not store rank/type info in their
descriptors), were not singled out to be "disadvantaged" intentionally
nor even by accident (there were lengthy discussions over the rank/type
issue). Neither was IBM for passing OPTIONAL arguments differently from
others. Is it a better alternative to put everyone at a disadvantage,
i.e., force everyone to implement something utterly new, unused by
anyone at present, thing (as an example, read Nick's proposal), that is
actually less handy for users???
Also, note that those vendors that carry around info in their
descriptors already did some extra work to add that to their compiler
Finally, without the rank/type in a descriptor assumed-type and rank
dummies become useless. It seemed they were in fact everyone's favorite,
probably because everyone has desired them at some point in Fortran
usage. Of course, we can add 3^3 different types of descriptors, one for
assumed-shape, one for assumed-type, etc., and combinations thereof, but
you will still not to implement it so why not simplify the TR to begin with?
More information about the J3