(j3.2006) Materials for 199

[Van Snyder]

On Fri, 2012-09-21 at 17:47 -0500, Bill Long wrote:
> This seems superior to the cumbersome MACRO facility.  More along the 
> lines of templates, which are requested with some regularity.   It seems 
> more like a candidate for F201x, than for another TS.  But I don't 
> really want to spend a lot of time on this at m199.  It is more 
> appropriate for the Delft meeting.

J3 should at least have a cursory look at it, maybe only Clause 2:
Requirements, to decide whether to advocate for it, as a national body,
at Delft.  This could wait until February.  Maybe if we ponder it
offline via email, we could vote yea or nay at a February TAG meeting
without taking much plenary time on it.  On the other hand, there are so
far no papers for 199 in the repository.

I don't know about the "superior" part, but it is certainly simpler.
Also keep in mind that we could still do macros or parameterized modules
later, without changing anything in the specification of parameterized
subprograms, as described in the paper I circulated yesterday.

Speaking of that paper... I've moved the specification of the default
value for a subprogram parameter from the subroutine or function
statement to an INTEGER, KIND statement, for consistency with type
definitions.  If and when the paper appears at a meeting, that revision
will be in it.

> Cheers,
> Bill
> 
> 
> On 9/20/12 10:20 PM, Van Snyder wrote:
> > On Tue, 2012-09-18 at 20:44 -0700, Van Snyder wrote:
> >
> >> The simpler scheme I have in mind is to provide for definition of
> >> parameterized or "abstract" subprograms, which cannot be invoked
> >> directly....
> >
> > I don't know whether this meets Malcolm's "really**7 simple" criterion;
> > maybe it's only "really**4 simple."  I've put together a description of
> > abstract subprograms and how they're used.  It's in the format of a TR,
> > complete with the repetitive top-down development.
> >
> > Counting cover page, frontispiece, ISO boilerplate, introduction,
> > foreword, it's 14 pages.
> >
> > There are almost four pages of narrative description, and just over
> > three pages of draft edits.
> >
> > My estimate that it would add fewer than five pages to the standard
> > appears to have been an over estimate.  It looks like fewer than two,
> > because it introduces only a few new ideas, and exploits mechanisms and
> > concepts we already have in place.  If the examples in the paper are put
> > into Annex C in the standard, that would add one more page.
> >
> > During F08 development, at least at the beginning, we had a 010 document
> > that listed paper numbers for specs, syntax and edits.  This quickly
> > became irrelevant, as we dribbled in pieces of features a screw here, a
> > rivet there, some bubble gum, some duct tape....  It might make for more
> > coherent development if we kept a coherent "project" paper for each
> > feature until we are quite convinced it's complete, as we would for a
> > real TR or TS, but without the ISO boilerplate.  The 010 document would
> > list the current version.  Each version should list the paper numbers of
> > previous versions in a "history" section.  This precludes frequent
> > revision of 007, unless the champions for features agree to go through
> > accumulated edits and update them when it comes time to put the feature
> > into 007.
> >
> > If projects interact we could insert UTI's in all of those that
> > interdepend upon one another, so as not to forget integration issues.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > J3 mailing list
> > J3 at mailman.j3-fortran.org
> > http://mailman.j3-fortran.org/mailman/listinfo/j3
> >
>