From J.L.Schonfelder@liverpool.ac.uk Fri Jan 6 14:23:55 1995 Received: from mailhub.liverpool.ac.uk (mail.liv.ac.uk) by dkuug.dk with SMTP id AA14772 (5.65c8/IDA-1.4.4j for ); Fri, 6 Jan 1995 15:24:45 +0100 Received: from pop.liv.ac.uk by mail.liv.ac.uk with SMTP (PP); Fri, 6 Jan 1995 14:23:57 +0000 Date: Fri, 6 Jan 1995 14:23:55 GMT From: Lawrie Schonfelder Subject: Re: (x3j3.1995-18) Re: interp 185 To: Richard Bleikamp Cc: SC22WG5@dkuug.dk Message-Id: Priority: Normal Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII X-Charset: ASCII X-Char-Esc: 29 It is my view that with the publication of corrigendum 2 the iterpretation processing is of limited relevance qua interpretation. We should now be treating defects as things that we fix in f95. We do it right in 95 and stop worrying about what we thought or intended in 198x when designing F90 except to the extent that that might be relevant to getting the design right now.. I am happy to say this again to Jerry and/or WG5. If we are serious in intending an F95 revision and I believe WG5 is, a third corrigendum to F90 is essentially pointless. On Fri, 6 Jan 95 8:04:22 CST Richard Bleikamp wrote: > From: Richard Bleikamp > Date: Fri, 6 Jan 95 8:04:22 CST > Subject: Re: (x3j3.1995-18) Re: interp 185 > To: Lawrie Schonfelder > > I'm just writing the interp against F90. > > To address the issue in F95, the appropriate subgroup needs to fix it > NOW, before the Jan meeting. I think JOR might be reviewing those chapters > for the upcoming meeting. But I don't know if thats the right group to pursue > this or not. Why don't you ask Jerry how to address this? > > Rich -- Dr.J.L.Schonfelder Director, Computing Services Dept. The University of Liverpool, UK e-mail J.L.Schonfelder@liv.ac.uk phone: +44(51)794-3716 fax: +44(51)794-3759