Going from Fortran IV for CDC to any other Fortran
in [Fortran]
|
Prev: Problem with automatic reallocation of allocatable scalar on assignment
Next: a wiki entry for gfortran
From: Richard Maine on 8 Aug 2010 14:32 Ron Shepard <ron-shepard(a)NOSPAM.comcast.net> wrote: [on Robin's paraphrase of me] > I have to say that the > above two sentences are not accurate representations of posts to > this thread for the past few days. I'd agree. Seems like every time he cites someone, including himself, he has to paraphrase the citation to twist it into whatever he wants to claim it said instead of what it actually said. (But then when you quote his exact words, apparently that's a misrepresentation of what he said because those words really meant something else). This is a familliar pattern. I see no point in detailing the corrections. I'll now go back to ignoring Robin's posts as not worth responding to. -- Richard Maine | Good judgment comes from experience; email: last name at domain . net | experience comes from bad judgment. domain: summertriangle | -- Mark Twain
From: mecej4 on 8 Aug 2010 14:57 Richard Maine wrote: > mecej4 <mecej4.nyetspam(a)opFeramail.com> wrote: > >> Richard Maine wrote: >> >> > Probably f66 compiler manuals. IBM was quite late in releasing their >> > f77. I forget the exact date. I think it was before 1985, but I know it >> > was late, >> >> I have a copy of IBM GC26-3986-1, Release 1.1, the 2nd. edition, January >> 1982, VS FORTRAN, Application Programming: Language Reference. The >> preface says "... includes full ANS FORTRAN plus IBM extensions". >> >> ENTRY is definitely there, and is covered in pages 81-83. > > That doesn't tell me for sure whether it was f77 or f66 plus ENTRY as an > externsion. After all, f66 was also an ANS Fortran. I'm fairly sure I > recall some IBM f66 compilers as having ENTRY as an extension. In fact, > I think I recall having some porting pains because both the IBM and CDC > compilers had ENTRY, but with different syntax. I think the CDC > extension had no argument list on the ENTRY, though I could be confusing > different compilers on that. > The preface says "includes full ANS FORTRAN (X3.9-1978) plus IBM extensions". The abbreviation "F77" had probably not yet been created. In this manual, ENTRY is not flagged as an extension. Having a different argument list than that in the preceding SUBROUTINE or FUNCTION declaration is stated as being allowed. -- mecej4
From: Richard Maine on 8 Aug 2010 15:28 mecej4 <mecej4.nyetspam(a)opFeramail.com> wrote: > Richard Maine wrote: > > That doesn't tell me for sure whether it was f77 or f66 plus ENTRY as an > > externsion. > The preface says "includes full ANS FORTRAN (X3.9-1978) plus IBM > extensions". Ah. That's more explicit then. > In this manual, ENTRY is not flagged as an extension. Right. It would not be an extension as it is part of full ANS Fortran (X3.9-1978), though not of subset ANS Fortran X3.9-1978. (For f77, the full and subset languages were described on facing pages of the same document, unlike f66, where they were different documents.) -- Richard Maine | Good judgment comes from experience; email: last name at domain . net | experience comes from bad judgment. domain: summertriangle | -- Mark Twain
From: Nick Maclaren on 8 Aug 2010 15:44 In article <1jmwntg.82slc6quhxewN%nospam(a)see.signature>, Richard Maine <nospam(a)see.signature> wrote: >mecej4 <mecej4.nyetspam(a)opFeramail.com> wrote: >> Richard Maine wrote: > >> > That doesn't tell me for sure whether it was f77 or f66 plus ENTRY as an >> > externsion. > >> The preface says "includes full ANS FORTRAN (X3.9-1978) plus IBM >> extensions". > >Ah. That's more explicit then. VS Fortran was the compiler I described the history of. Regards, Nick Maclaren.
From: Gary L. Scott on 8 Aug 2010 15:38
On 8/8/2010 2:44 PM, Nick Maclaren wrote: > In article<1jmwntg.82slc6quhxewN%nospam(a)see.signature>, > Richard Maine<nospam(a)see.signature> wrote: >> mecej4<mecej4.nyetspam(a)opFeramail.com> wrote: >>> Richard Maine wrote: >> >>>> That doesn't tell me for sure whether it was f77 or f66 plus ENTRY as an >>>> externsion. >> >>> The preface says "includes full ANS FORTRAN (X3.9-1978) plus IBM >>> extensions". >> >> Ah. That's more explicit then. > > VS Fortran was the compiler I described the history of. > I use it to this day, in fact last week... > > Regards, > Nick Maclaren. |