[J3] (SC22WG5.6277) RE: [ukfortran] Fortran 90 and BOZ literals

[Dick Hendrickson]

I have an HTML copy that has Steve's missing BOZ lines in it.  I could
e-mail a copy to someone .

Dick Hendrickson

On Tue, Aug 11, 2020 at 6:00 AM Malcolm Cohen via J3 <
j3 at mailman.j3-fortran.org> wrote:

> BTW, Fortran 90 (1991) predates PDF (1993), so whatever N692 is is
> someone's attempt at a fixup.
>
> (And it's not groff - groff only appeared in 1990, a bit late for
> typesetting a document we were working on several years prior. According to
> Wikipedia, the "first stable version" of groff was November 1991, several
> months after publication.)
>
> If I recall correctly, the Fortran 90 standard was typeset using
> Sun-proprietary macros (and possible Sun-proprietary troff technology).
> Furthermore, due to the use of proprietary technology, (again IIRC) that
> troff source code was not supplied to other committee members. The Fortran
> 95 source started out with a Framemaker reincarnation of Fortran 90 (and I
> recall it had some glitches from the conversion process).
>
> Unfortunately, the one person who really knew what happened, and thus
> could explain the details properly, has recently passed away; that is, Walt
> Brainerd.
>
> So w.r.t. the Fortran 90 standard, the "gold standard" is the published
> document. In particular, there was no PDF. If someone sometime somehow
> could scan a published copy in, that would be useful as a historical
> document, but apart from personal or committee use, would doubtless be a
> violation of ISO copyright.
>
> Cheers,
> --
> ..............Malcolm Cohen, NAG Oxford/Tokyo.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Robert Corbett <rpcorbett at att.net>
> Sent: Tuesday, August 11, 2020 6:44 PM
> To: General J3 interest list <j3 at mailman.j3-fortran.org>
> Cc: WG5 List <sc22wg5 at open-std.org>
> Subject: [ukfortran] (SC22WG5.6272) [J3] Fortran 90 and BOZ literals
>
>
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> > On Aug 11, 2020, at 2:14 AM, Shterenlikht, Anton via J3 <
> j3 at mailman.j3-fortran.org> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >> On 11 Aug 2020, at 09:59, Robert Corbett via J3 <
> j3 at mailman.j3-fortran.org> wrote:
> >>
> >> The file
> >>
> >> https://j3-fortran.org/doc/year/90/S8.115.pdf
> >>
> >> contains a late draft of the
> >> Fortran 90 standard.  I trust
> >> it more than I trust the N692
> >> document.
> >
> > Interesting document.
> > How close is it the published standard?
> > There are lots of handwritten notes - did those made it to the
> > published version?
> >
> > Just a few pages later, in 4.3.2.1
> > the 4 examples of nondefault character literal constants apper blank
> > in N692, while they are present in S8.115.pdf
> >
> > Another glitch in N692 is in 4.3.2.1.1, last line before the numbered
> > list, after:
> >
> > "For the default character type, the only constraints on the collating
> sequence are:"
> >
> > there is:
> >
> >    @.EQ delim $$ @.EN
> >
> > which is groff (or troff at that time?) gone bad - that groff command
> > is meant to instruct groff to use the dollar sign as a delimiter for
> > inline equation environment.
> > But seems it was interepreted as a literal text.
> >
> > Perhaps somebody somewhere still has that g/troff src?
> > If so, we can try to fix it and produce the correct Postscript/PDF.
> >
> > Anton
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> ukfortran mailing list
> https://lists.accu.org/mailman/listinfo/ukfortran
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mailman.j3-fortran.org/pipermail/j3/attachments/20200811/33b7fb44/attachment.htm>