Be standard?

Dear all,

I start with my first question for you, with the hope you are interested to discuss on.

In my _best practices_ I always considered the _standard compliance_ as a guideline of paramount relevance. However, I know that in some circumstances, _extensions_ could be very helpful. One of my favorite _extension_ (if I can name it as) is _OpenMP_: even if OpenMP paradigm is not best solution we have, I use it extensively. It is not standard in the sense it is not a part of the Fortran standard (as the brilliant CAF is now!), so I am always in a grey area when I think to OpenMP. However, the OpenMP directives are defined as comments, so my _obsessive worries_ about standardization are partially quieted: even without a compiler supporting OpenMP paradigm, the code could be considered quite standard (at least if there are not specific call OpenMP runtime library I think).

My principal reason to be standard compliance, is portability: I think that if we try to be as standard as possible, portability is greatly enhanced.

What do you think about _standardization_?

P.S. one reasons why I have not still deeply tried the wonderful Hybrid-Fortran of @muellermichel is related to portability and standardization: codes using Hybrid-Fortran are _standard_ at least in the sense of OpenMP I above described? If I remember right, Hybrid-Fortran enabled codes have specific statement that must parsed by Hybrid-Fortran parser, but @muellermichel can explain. I am citing Hybrid-Fortran beacuse it is just a concrete example where I will happy to lost standard compliance in flavour of great help (in this case parallel performance, great Michel!).