GNU Fortran 95 project started.
Toon Moene
As some of you might already have noticed (either through reading my
signature on comp.lang.fortran - or by perusing http://lwn.net/daily),
the project to bring about GNU Fortran 95 has started.
The official announcement is on the GCC home page:
which refers to its home page:
for details.
Cheers,
--
Toon Moene - mailto:to...@moene.indiv.nluug.nl - phoneto: +31 346 214290
Saturnushof 14, 3738 XG Maartensdijk, The Netherlands
GNU Fortran 77: http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/g77_news.html
GNU Fortran 95: http://xena.eas.asu.edu/~andy (under construction)
Gary Scott
Andrej Panjkov
> >
> > As some of you might already have noticed (either through reading my
> > signature on comp.lang.fortran - or by perusing http://lwn.net/daily),
> > the project to bring about GNU Fortran 95 has started.
> >
Terrific! I'm looking forward to watching the progress of this work. A
question: is GNU Fortran 95 going to be a full standard compiler or a
subset?
Andrej
--
!--------------------------------------------------------------------------!
! Dr Andrej Panjkov, Analyst/Programmer !
! Numerical Modelling Project, Coal Mine Engineering Group !
! CSIRO Division of Exploration and Mining !
! Queensland Centre for Advanced Technologies Tel: +61 7 3212 4693 !
! PO Box 883, Kenmore (Brisbane), Fax: +61 7 3212 4455 !
! Queensland, Australia, 4069 Mobile: 0417 551 435 !
!--------------------------------------------------------------------------!
! Andrej....@dem.csiro.au A.Pa...@uq.net.au !
!--------------------------------------------------------------------------!
! This email is formatted for 76 character displays, using fixed fonts. !
!--------------------------------------------------------------------------!
Andrew Vaught
>
> > >
> > > As some of you might already have noticed (either through reading my
> > > signature on comp.lang.fortran - or by perusing http://lwn.net/daily),
> > > the project to bring about GNU Fortran 95 has started.
> > >
>
> Terrific! I'm looking forward to watching the progress of this work. A
> question: is GNU Fortran 95 going to be a full standard compiler or a
> subset?
Full.
Andy
----------------- XOLD(K,IC,I)=
Andy Vaught .... DO ITERS=1, 10 XOLD(K,IC,I)
an...@xena.eas.asu.edu | | /CALLMSOLVE(A,B,X,I,ITERS,TOL)+(RANNYU(0)
Arizona State University ======|WRITE(6,'(I5,2X,F12.6)')ITERS,TOL -HALF)
Tempe, Arizona USA OOOOOO \ENDDORETURN PARAMETER(ZERO=1.D0)*TENTH*DELTA
Toon Moene
> > > As some of you might already have noticed (either through reading my
> > > signature on comp.lang.fortran - or by perusing http://lwn.net/daily),
> > > the project to bring about GNU Fortran 95 has started.
> Terrific! I'm looking forward to watching the progress of this work. A
> question: is GNU Fortran 95 going to be a full standard compiler or a
> subset?
Both Andy and I, and independently, Walt Brainerd, came to the
conclusion that it might be useful to first target the "F" language as a
handy "half way" mark.
The "half way" is in the eye of the beholder, of course ...
Ralph jay Frisbie
<to...@moene.indiv.nluug.nl> wrote:
>Andrej Panjkov wrote:
>
>> > > As some of you might already have noticed (either through reading my
>> > > signature on comp.lang.fortran - or by perusing http://lwn.net/daily),
>> > > the project to bring about GNU Fortran 95 has started.
>
>> Terrific! I'm looking forward to watching the progress of this work. A
>> question: is GNU Fortran 95 going to be a full standard compiler or a
>> subset?
>
>Both Andy and I, and independently, Walt Brainerd, came to the
>conclusion that it might be useful to first target the "F" language as a
>handy "half way" mark.
>
>T
Just adding my 2 cents, a subset ala F or ELF90 compiler,
but with the F95 extensions, would be a darn good first step, and very
useful. But please, if at all possible, don't create a divergent
subset, Probably go with the F subset.
Ralph Frisbie
Ralph Jay Frisbie
a saucer lover,
but not the inventor.
Gordon Sande
F is for first semester Introduction to Programming, ELF90 is for the
second semester follow on, F90/95/200x is for later. First semester is
awfully restrictive.
Steven G. Kargl
Toon Moene <to...@moene.indiv.nluug.nl> writes:
> Andrej Panjkov wrote:
>
>> > > As some of you might already have noticed (either through reading my
>> > > signature on comp.lang.fortran - or by perusing http://lwn.net/daily),
>> > > the project to bring about GNU Fortran 95 has started.
>
>> Terrific! I'm looking forward to watching the progress of this work. A
>> question: is GNU Fortran 95 going to be a full standard compiler or a
>> subset?
>
> Both Andy and I, and independently, Walt Brainerd, came to the
> conclusion that it might be useful to first target the "F" language as a
> handy "half way" mark.
>
Does this mean that Walt will get Imagine1 to donate their
F compiler to the FSF?
--
Steve
charles d. russell
Keep in mind those fortran users who are not primarily programmers, for whom
a protected debugging environment may be more useful than any exotic language
features. I have in mind the old VAX VMS Fortran as an ideal to aim for,
where every error got automatically traced back to a line of source code. I
gather that gdb will need some work too, but please consider this as a design
goal.
Gary Scott
mention of financial contributions on the G95 project pages, I would
assume that either financial contributions are unnecessary or they are
considered "secondary" (or otherwise not kosher). What are the rules
regarding financial contributions (some of us don't write C code or at
least not unless we have to, but still want to help).
FSF rules seem to require unrestricted contributions, which I strongly
object to.
Maybe I'm jumping the gun...
Toon Moene wrote:
>
> Lectoribus Salutem,
>
> As some of you might already have noticed (either through reading my
> signature on comp.lang.fortran - or by perusing http://lwn.net/daily),
> the project to bring about GNU Fortran 95 has started.
>
> The official announcement is on the GCC home page:
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org
>
> which refers to its home page:
>
> http://xena.eas.asu.edu/~andy
>
> for details.
>
> Cheers,
>
> --
> Toon Moene - mailto:to...@moene.indiv.nluug.nl - phoneto: +31 346 214290
> Saturnushof 14, 3738 XG Maartensdijk, The Netherlands
> GNU Fortran 77: http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/g77_news.html
> GNU Fortran 95: http://xena.eas.asu.edu/~andy (under construction)
--
Gary Scott
mailto:sco...@flash.net
mailto:webm...@fortranlib.com
http://www.fortranlib.com
Support the GNU Fortran G95 Project: http://xena.eas.asu.edu/~andy/
Toon Moene
No, that's not what it means - it means just what it says (:-): Namely
that it would be easier to first hit a target that's not as complex as a
full Fortran 95 compiler, without making it unnecessarily difficult to
complete a full Fortran 95 compiler later (by targetting a well-defined
subset).
The reason it's interesting that Walt also thought that a good idea is
of course that he has a very good grip on what the exact language
definition of "F" is. No compiler writer gets anywhere without a good
language definition (this has always been Craig Burley's gripe with
language extensions - it's very hard to do a good job on supporting them
(in g77) when there isn't a description of them at least on the level of
detail the Standard Language has been described in).
Tony T. Warnock
of the routines in NETLIB.
H C Pumphrey
|> One problem with doing a GNU-F compiler is that F does not complie many
|> of the routines in NETLIB.
Not that big a problem IMHO since
(a) g77 will compile many NETLIB routines (how many? Anyone know?).
(b) F can link routines and libraries compiled with g77 (you have to make an
interface block -- a good thing in some ways)
(c) The intention wasn't to stop with a GNU-F compiler but to regard this
as a step on the way to a full Fortran 95.
While I'm here, may I join the chorus of encouragement for this project?
I only wish I had money or compiler-writing skills to contribute. (I'm game to
beta-test!) If VA linux (or someone) want to leverage sales of Linux boxes to
scientists they could do worse than throw some dosh at this.
Hugh
--
==========================================================================
Hugh C. Pumphrey | Telephone 0131-650-6026
Department of Meteorology | FAX 0131-650-5780
The University of Edinburgh | Replace 0131 with +44-131 if outside U.K.
EDINBURGH EH9 3JZ, Scotland | Email h...@met.ed.ac.uk
OBDisclaimer: The views expressed herein are mine, not those of UofE.
==========================================================================
Carlie Coats
H C Pumphrey <h...@newsread.ed.ac.uk> wrote:
> In article <38DA2851...@cic-mail.lanl.gov>, "Tony T. Warnock" <u09...@cic-mail.lanl.gov> writes:
>
> |> One problem with doing a GNU-F compiler is that F does not complie many
> |> of the routines in NETLIB.
>
> Not that big a problem IMHO since
> (a) g77 will compile many NETLIB routines (how many? Anyone know?).
> (b) F can link routines and libraries compiled with g77 (you have to make an
> interface block -- a good thing in some ways)
> (c) The intention wasn't to stop with a GNU-F compiler but to regard this
> as a step on the way to a full Fortran 95.
Are you sure this is not a problem ???
This is a MAJOR Quality-of-Implementation issue: on at least Sun and SGI,
the vendor-supplied "f77" and "f90" are NOT generally link-compatible --
I know from weary experience -- particularly if you're doing I/O.
Vendor-supplied "f77" and "f90" ompilers from Cray, DEC^H^H^HCompaq,
and IBM do not have this problem.
Let me put this in as a requested feature:
"g95" and "g77" should be fully link-compatible.
fwiw--
Carlie J. Coats, Jr. co...@ncsc.org
MCNC Environmental Programs phone: (919)248-9241
North Carolina Supercomputing Center fax: (919)248-9245
3021 Cornwallis Road P. O. Box 12889
Research Triangle Park, N. C. 27709-2889 USA
"My opinions are my own, and I've got *lots* of them!"