From Keith.Bierman@eng.sun.com Thu Mar  2 05:47:33 1995
Received: from Sun.COM (koriel.Sun.COM) by dkuug.dk with SMTP id AA12484
  (5.65c8/IDA-1.4.4j for <SC22WG5@dkuug.dk>); Thu, 2 Mar 1995 22:49:12 +0100
Received: from Eng.Sun.COM (engmail2.Eng.Sun.COM) by Sun.COM (sun-barr.Sun.COM)
	id AA22099; Thu, 2 Mar 95 13:48:33 PST
Received: from chiba.Eng.Sun.COM by Eng.Sun.COM (5.x/SMI-5.3)
	id AA15721; Thu, 2 Mar 1995 13:48:20 -0800
Received: from localhost by chiba.Eng.Sun.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1)
	id AA07182; Thu, 2 Mar 95 13:47:34 PST
Message-Id: <9503022147.AA07182@chiba.Eng.Sun.COM>
To: Lawrie Schonfelder <J.L.Schonfelder@liverpool.ac.uk>
Cc: SC22WG5@dkuug.dk
Subject: Re: (SC22WG5.742) Interoperability 
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 02 Mar 95 13:00:15 GMT."
             <199503021647.AA05755@dkuug.dk> 
Date: Thu, 02 Mar 95 13:47:33 PST
From: Keith.Bierman@eng.sun.com
X-Charset: ASCII
X-Char-Esc: 29




> To be more specific. I think rather than fall into the CLIx trap we should 
> produce a first draft that involves only those datatypes that do have clear 
> representation in both languages and we should avoid trying to define mappings 

The current Fortran datatypes preclude usage with common C
interfaces. If we don't add the C datatypes the work is of exceedingly
limited value. 

I neglected to mention in my previous missive that some common (GUIish
stuff) has names longer than 31 characters, another reason for some
sort of external to Fortran mechanism.