(j3.2006) (SC22WG5.5065) J3 work plan

[Rafik Zurob]

j3-bounces at mailman.j3-fortran.org wrote on 05/08/2013 10:48:40 PM:

> From: Van Snyder
...
> Concerning UK-10.1a (delete arithmetic IF), my colleagues who have
> millions of lines of legacy code to maintain are concerned about the
> amount of work this might impose on them.  They like to use "conform to
> the standard" switches but fear their codes won't compile if they turn
> on the switch, even if all vendors continue to offer arithmetic IF as a
> "convenient extension." 

I don't think anybody would be removing arithmetic IF anytime soon.  We 
still claim conformance to the previous standards, not just the latest.

Usually, vendors have switches for "conforms to the X standard" where X is 
any Fortran standard since FORTRAN 77.  So your colleagues should still be 
able to compile this legacy code with "conforms to the F2008 standard", or 
if this really FORTRAN 77 code, "conforms to the FORTRAN 77 standard".

One advantage of deleting these features (from my point of view as a 
compiler developer) is that we don't need to make sure (or even test) that 
new features work with deleted features.  This is not the case with 
obsolescent features, which are still part of the standard.  For example, 
alternate return is an obsolescent feature, but a user on 
comp.lang.fortran thought of a way of using it with type-bound procedures 
to simulate exceptions:
https://groups.google.com/forum/?fromgroups#!original/comp.lang.fortran/9p7ArVmpxPo/9C9ohHuval0J

Regards

Rafik