From lindaog@microsoft.com Wed Feb  8 01:51:18 1995
Received: from netmail2.microsoft.com by dkuug.dk with SMTP id AA12926
  (5.65c8/IDA-1.4.4j for <SC22WG5@dkuug.dk>); Wed, 8 Feb 1995 19:01:04 +0100
Received:  by netmail2.microsoft.com (5.65/25-eef)
	id AA24683; Wed, 8 Feb 95 10:01:36 -0800
Message-Id: <9502081801.AA24683@netmail2.microsoft.com>
Received: by netmail2 using fxenixd 1.0 Wed, 08 Feb 95 10:01:35 PST
X-Msmail-Message-Id:  B15D40CE
X-Msmail-Conversation-Id:  B15D40CE
From: Linda O'Gara <lindaog@microsoft.com>
To: SC22WG5@dkuug.dk
Date: Wed,  8 Feb 95 09:51:18 PST
Subject: RE: (SC22WG5.697) Re:  ISO, DIN, ANSI, JSA, ...
X-Charset: ASCII
X-Char-Esc: 29

Loren writes:

Fortran 90 is succeeding because it is well designed,
not because it is ISO/IEC/ANSI Standard Number So and So.


I was recently asked a question that's somewhat relevant to this 
comment.  It was asked facetiously.  However, I wonder if it's not a 
fair question to really ask ourselves.  The question was "Is the number 
of Fortran 90 programmers now greater than the number of Fortran 90 
compiler developers?"

Are people really using Fortran 90, or are we just selling Fortran 90 
compilers?  Does anyone have real experience with real people using 
Fortran 90 to build a real product?  (Where product means something 
that other people use, but not necessarily sold).

ljo