(j3.2006) my CD vote

[Van Snyder]

On Tue, 2017-04-11 at 14:53 +0900, Cohen Malcolm wrote:
> >Then don't advocate to invalidate legacy software.
> 
> It is not your position to tell anyone else what to advocate, and not your 
> position to demand that anyone else "fixes" stuff.

It is not your position to tell anyone what they can request.

> We the committee have deleted stuff before, it's not even unusual.  Fortran 
> 77 and Fortran 95 both deleted features, and yet were quite popular and 
> successful standards.
> 
> Not only is the impact of deprecating DPROD being grossly over-exaggerated 
> here, the effort that would be involved in "fixing" it is trivial.

You don't know our code.  You don't know the code in the libraries other
than NAG that we use.  Some of these libraries were developed decades
ago by people who have since died or retired, but we still use them
because they work.

If it's trivial, then you can volunteer to do it.  We don't have the
staff for it.  If you don't want to solve the problem you would create
for me, don't advocate to create the problem.  Just leave well enough
alone.  Processors would probably compile it forever, but if style
guides don't want warnings, this kind of pointlessly gratuitous
troublemaking still isn't helpful.

> Cheers,

The excuse for deleting things was that they had fallen into disuse
(PAUSE) or were not well defined (vertical format control).  When did we
delete things that users claimed were still in use?