Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

Bookshelf Help and Lib for f77

35 views
Skip to first unread message

W. eWatson

unread,
Oct 20, 2011, 5:12:03 PM10/20/11
to
So as not to obscure a dpb comment from into the depths of another
thread , I'm bringing it up to the surface.

He states, "I'll point out that the F77 Bookshelf Help file has a
reference link to every one of these in it w/ helpful longish titles to
identify them from other than the help files themselves "

Where is the Bookshelf Help file?

Is the implementation of the LIB facility in OW f77 similar to other
compilers, or have f77 compilers struck out in their own way?

dpb

unread,
Oct 20, 2011, 6:22:39 PM10/20/11
to
On 10/20/2011 4:12 PM, W. eWatson wrote:
> So as not to obscure a dpb comment from into the depths of another
> thread , I'm bringing it up to the surface.
>
> He states, "I'll point out that the F77 Bookshelf Help file has a
> reference link to every one of these in it w/ helpful longish titles to
> identify them from other than the help files themselves "
>
> Where is the Bookshelf Help file?

Same place I've pointed to numerous times before... :)

C:\OWATCOM\binnt\fbooks.hlp

where C:\OWATCOM will be your installation drive/directory for the
OpenWatcom compiler.

> Is the implementation of the LIB facility in OW f77 similar to other
> compilers, or have f77 compilers struck out in their own way?

Pretty much altho there are some syntactic differences from exactly the
MS Lib iirc, there's nothing really unique or different than any other
librarian utility I've ever used (at least in the PC world, mainframes
were a whole different story, of course).

--

W. eWatson

unread,
Oct 20, 2011, 10:04:38 PM10/20/11
to
On 10/20/2011 3:22 PM, dpb wrote:
> On 10/20/2011 4:12 PM, W. eWatson wrote:
>> So as not to obscure a dpb comment from into the depths of another
>> thread , I'm bringing it up to the surface.
>>
>> He states, "I'll point out that the F77 Bookshelf Help file has a
>> reference link to every one of these in it w/ helpful longish titles to
>> identify them from other than the help files themselves "
>>
>> Where is the Bookshelf Help file?

>
> Same place I've pointed to numerous times before... :)
Your description suggested that it was elsewhere, since you wrote out
the entire name--not just fbook.hlp. Ah, a pointer like
Vanna White. :-)
>
> C:\OWATCOM\binnt\fbooks.hlp
>
> where C:\OWATCOM will be your installation drive/directory for the
> OpenWatcom compiler.
>
>> Is the implementation of the LIB facility in OW f77 similar to other
>> compilers, or have f77 compilers struck out in their own way?
>
> Pretty much altho there are some syntactic differences from exactly the
> MS Lib iirc, there's nothing really unique or different than any other
> librarian utility I've ever used (at least in the PC world, mainframes
> were a whole different story, of course).
>
> --
It seems that the few f77 books I have seen there is little description
of libraries, user created. My limited sample would suggest the concept
did not occur in f77. Perhaps later.

W. eWatson

unread,
Oct 20, 2011, 10:06:54 PM10/20/11
to
On 10/20/2011 3:22 PM, dpb wrote:
> On 10/20/2011 4:12 PM, W. eWatson wrote:
>> So as not to obscure a dpb comment from into the depths of another
>> thread , I'm bringing it up to the surface.
>>
>> He states, "I'll point out that the F77 Bookshelf Help file has a
>> reference link to every one of these in it w/ helpful longish titles to
>> identify them from other than the help files themselves "
>>
>> Where is the Bookshelf Help file?

>
> Same place I've pointed to numerous times before... :)
Your description suggested that it was elsewhere, since you wrote out
the entire name--not just fbook.hlp. Ah, a pointer like
Vanna White. :-)
>
> C:\OWATCOM\binnt\fbooks.hlp
>
> where C:\OWATCOM will be your installation drive/directory for the
> OpenWatcom compiler.
>
>> Is the implementation of the LIB facility in OW f77 similar to other
>> compilers, or have f77 compilers struck out in their own way?
>
> Pretty much altho there are some syntactic differences from exactly the
> MS Lib iirc, there's nothing really unique or different than any other
> librarian utility I've ever used (at least in the PC world, mainframes
> were a whole different story, of course).
>
> --

dpb

unread,
Oct 20, 2011, 10:26:21 PM10/20/11
to
On 10/20/2011 9:04 PM, W. eWatson wrote:
...

> It seems that the few f77 books I have seen there is little description
> of libraries, user created. My limited sample would suggest the concept
> did not occur in f77. Perhaps later.

Libraries have nothing to do w/ Fortran, per se. They certainly existed
(and FORTRAN compilers/tool sets were capable of creating and using
them) long before F77. But, that's part of the compiler/implementation,
not part of the Standard or the language hence it isn't covered in texts
on Fortran but in the documentation of the various compilers.

For PC's all are quite similar since all have to be able to build
executables that can link to a given OS/set of APIs. Similarly for the
other classes of machines that run similar and/or compatible OS'es.
OTOH, when OS'es were proprietary and wildly different on different
hardware, there was far less commonality.

--

user1

unread,
Oct 21, 2011, 7:52:23 AM10/21/11
to
In the thread "E3033 error in 1.9", back in July 2010, I posted an
example of how you might use OW command line tools to put your own f77
subprograms into a library.



dpb

unread,
Oct 21, 2011, 9:33:20 AM10/21/11
to
BTW, the Librarian is one of the OW F77 Tools and the help for it is in
the Chapter on those tools in the Bookshelf help file...

--

W. eWatson

unread,
Oct 23, 2011, 10:43:46 AM10/23/11
to
Unfortunately, it looks like that post is gone from the NG.

W. eWatson

unread,
Oct 23, 2011, 11:11:26 AM10/23/11
to
I found it via Google. Too bad it's for the command line.

I'm surprised old fogey (his own description) didn't scare away someone
else from posting here. :-) Hats off to you.

W. eWatson

unread,
Oct 23, 2011, 11:13:52 AM10/23/11
to
I found it via Google. Too bad it's for the command line.

I'm surprised old fogey (his own description) didn't scare away someone
else from posting here. Hats off to you.

dpb

unread,
Oct 23, 2011, 11:41:04 AM10/23/11
to
What's wrong w/ the command line? :) Its the most efficient tool there
is, particularly for small stuff like you're talking of.

In the IDE there really is no need for it; you simply make references to
the required sources, libraries, resources, etc., and it builds a make
file automagically (which you can export to look at, btw).

--



dpb

unread,
Oct 23, 2011, 2:19:53 PM10/23/11
to
On 10/23/2011 10:41 AM, dpb wrote:
...

> In the IDE there really is no need for it; you simply make references to
> the required sources, libraries, resources, etc., and it builds a make
> file automagically (which you can export to look at, btw).
...

"It" being documentation on the librarian utility, that is...

Which makefile is a commandline tool (wmake) input file, btw... :)

--

user1

unread,
Oct 23, 2011, 7:50:19 PM10/23/11
to
I don't especially like the OpenWatcom IDE, and prefer the command line
tools. If you try to follow that earlier example, be aware that a small
bug in the wfl386.exe utility was discussed in the same thread.

Also, I would probably refer to myself as a middle aged fogey ;-)

W. eWatson

unread,
Oct 26, 2011, 6:46:13 PM10/26/11
to
Frankly, most people here are.

Lynn McGuire

unread,
Oct 27, 2011, 12:08:37 PM10/27/11
to
Hey, I resemble that !

Lynn

E. S. Fabian

unread,
Oct 27, 2011, 12:19:10 PM10/27/11
to
Lynn McGuire:
I am too old for that.
--
Steve



0 new messages