Compaq Visual Fortran
delyn
mind parting with? I am willing to buy one. Old Power flow software
I have will only work with a Compaq fortran compiler.
none
What is in your code that is so specific to PowerStation? The Intel
compiler comes with lots of PowerStation compatability options, including,
if I remember correctly, the ability to read PS-formatted binary files. We
recently took some old code where the only PS-specific need was to read
binary input files, theknowledge of the contents of which are lost, but
are vital (they define some rivers we were modelling); and it worked fine.
Richard Maine
> On Fri, 15 Aug 2008 14:21:08 -0700, delyn wrote:
>
> > Does anyone have a Compaq Visual Fortran compiler that they would not
> > mind parting with? I am willing to buy one. Old Power flow software
> > I have will only work with a Compaq fortran compiler.
>
> What is in your code that is so specific to PowerStation? The Intel
> compiler comes with lots of PowerStation compatability options,...
Maybe I missed something, but I didn't notice that the OP said anything
about PowerStation. He was asking for CVF, not for MS PowerStation. Did
you perhaps misread the "Power Flow"?
--
Richard Maine | Good judgement comes from experience;
email: last name at domain . net | experience comes from bad judgement.
domain: summertriangle | -- Mark Twain
Paul van Delst
> On Fri, 15 Aug 2008 14:21:08 -0700, delyn wrote:
>
>> Does anyone have a Compaq Visual Fortran compiler that they would not
>> mind parting with? I am willing to buy one. Old Power flow software
>> I have will only work with a Compaq fortran compiler.
>
> What is in your code that is so specific to PowerStation?
Off the top of my head, reading the OP, I would hazard to say: nothing.
Last I checked, FPS and CVF were completely different products.
cheers,
paulv
Gary Scott
> none wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 15 Aug 2008 14:21:08 -0700, delyn wrote:
>>
>>> Does anyone have a Compaq Visual Fortran compiler that they would not
>>> mind parting with? I am willing to buy one. Old Power flow software
>>> I have will only work with a Compaq fortran compiler.
>>
>>
>> What is in your code that is so specific to PowerStation?
>
>
> Off the top of my head, reading the OP, I would hazard to say: nothing.
>
> Last I checked, FPS and CVF were completely different products.
Well, yes, but CVF implemented nearly all FPS extensions. Still wrong
question being answered, I assume.
>
> cheers,
>
> paulv
>
>
>
>> The Intel
>> compiler comes with lots of PowerStation compatability options,
>> including,
>> if I remember correctly, the ability to read PS-formatted binary
>> files. We
>> recently took some old code where the only PS-specific need was to read
>> binary input files, theknowledge of the contents of which are lost, but
>> are vital (they define some rivers we were modelling); and it worked
>> fine.
--
Gary Scott
mailto:garylscott@sbcglobal dot net
Fortran Library: http://www.fortranlib.com
Support the Original G95 Project: http://www.g95.org
-OR-
Support the GNU GFortran Project: http://gcc.gnu.org/fortran/index.html
If you want to do the impossible, don't hire an expert because he knows
it can't be done.
-- Henry Ford
Luka Djigas
<garyl...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>
>Well, yes, but CVF implemented nearly all FPS extensions. Still wrong
>question being answered, I assume.
>
>>
Yes, ... well, maybe not all, but a great deal of them. There was some
confusion with the names, as I remember (same thing, different name).
I could be wrong though, 'twas some time ago.
I find that one of the main differences between the two was that cvf
was much more "strict" about the code. With fps you could compile and
build things which wouldn't go through any other compiler.
best regards
ldigas
Gary Scott
The one that got me was file-scope variables and INTERFACE TO.
>
> best regards
> ldigas
Jan Gerrit Kootstra
Delyn,
I have one, V6.6 Profesional. I do not use it anymore, but I am afraid
that it might not install anymore due to license experation.
Like other posters state, is the Intel Visual Fortran not a better choice?
Kind regards,
Jan Gerrit Kootstra
delyn
wrote:
I have not tried it with Intel. But Siemens who owns the power flow
software states that it will only work with CVF. Siemens puts out a
CVF upgrade that might work even if it does not install properly. I
would be willing to buy your copy and try to install it. It is a
risk, but less risking than trying Intel I think.
What would you charge. I suggest purchasing using Paypal. I live in
Missouri, US, could you ship?
dpb
>> I have one, V6.6 Profesional. I do not use it anymore, but I am afraid
>> that it might not install anymore due to license experation.
>>
>> Like other posters state, is the Intel Visual Fortran not a better choice?
> I have not tried it with Intel. But Siemens who owns the power flow
> software states that it will only work with CVF. Siemens puts out a
> CVF upgrade that might work even if it does not install properly. I
> would be willing to buy your copy and try to install it. It is a
> risk, but less risking than trying Intel I think.
The license on CVF doesn't expire; the problem if there were to be one
would be if the V6.6 is an upgrade from a previous version rather than a
new, standalone copy. One would have to have the previous version(s)
and have them installed in order to install the upgrade if that were the
case. Jan will be able to clarify just what he has, hopefully.
I'd ask Siemens if the version information is current and what,
specifically is CVF-specific. It seems strange they would stay w/ an
obsolete compiler that hasn't been supported for years (unless you're
also working w/ a dated copy of PowerFlow).
I believe there are ways to get cost-free evaluation copies of IVF to
find out if it would work for you. That should be essentially risk free
other than some time/effort (and probably as suggested more profitable
course in the long run if it were to work).
--
none
> none <no...@none.net> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 15 Aug 2008 14:21:08 -0700, delyn wrote:
>>
>> > Does anyone have a Compaq Visual Fortran compiler that they would not
>> > mind parting with? I am willing to buy one. Old Power flow software
>> > I have will only work with a Compaq fortran compiler.
>>
>> What is in your code that is so specific to PowerStation? The Intel
>> compiler comes with lots of PowerStation compatability options,...
>
> Maybe I missed something, but I didn't notice that the OP said anything
> about PowerStation. He was asking for CVF, not for MS PowerStation. Did
> you perhaps misread the "Power Flow"?
I did misread. Same question - what is in CVF that IVF does not handle?
The gap between CVF & IVF seems even smaller. There are *utilities* in CVF
that are not in IVF, but that would not affect the *code*.
none
Unless he is linking against a library compiled using DVF - in which case
he might need to post which version of DVF he needs.
none
Odd things is that it is still availble from Simens, and their promotional
literature does not indicate that you need to purchase a Fortran (or any
other) compiler to use the software.
http://www.pti-us.org/pti/software/psse/future.cfm
I see that adding new features does require this
but there may be a built-in scripting language (FLECS) that does this, and
it also now supports Python
So an upgrade to a newer version may be simpler.
Gary Scott
I can't off the top of my head think of anything that CVF supported that
IVF doesn't support. The default calling mechanism may be different,
but it can be adjusted back to the CVF method. The front end for the
new IVF started as the same source code I believe.
>
> What would you charge. I suggest purchasing using Paypal. I live in
> Missouri, US, could you ship?
Jan Gerrit Kootstra
I warn you, I live in the Netherlands, so shipping might cost you a
couple of Dollars.
If you do not mind that, I will look for all the CD's.
I will have to take a look if I still have to whole series: DVF 5.x
until CVF 6.6.
I program on Linux now, so parting of CVF is not a problem.
Gary Scott
Is this one of those situations where you have an upgrade to an upgrade
to an upgrade? I hate that. I just had to go all the way back to DVF 5
to reinstall my CVF 6.6 recently because everything from DVF 5 was an
upgrade (well there may have been a shorter method, but it wasn't
immediately obvious).
>
> I program on Linux now, so parting of CVF is not a problem.
>
>
> Kind regards,
>
>
> Jan Gerrit Kootstra
dpb
...
> ... I just had to go all the way back to DVF 5
> upgrade (well there may have been a shorter method, but it wasn't
> immediately obvious).
I've done that as well, although it's been over a year now since the
last time...but undoubtedly it will occur again at some point. :)
There isn't any other way using the install program(s) -- they check for
the existence of the earlier versions.
The only way would be to manually extract stuff and copy it -- I've
never tried figuring the effort involved and the likelihood of success
were high and low enough, respectively, that the fullMonte from DVF6.5
would undoubtedly be the less costly path in the end.
But the point is valid that Jan's effort to help won't help unless he
does have the distribution CD's and valid S/N's for the fee-based
version(s)/upgrade(s). The no-fee upgrades are still available at the
HP site. In my (probably pretty typical) path from DVF6.5 to CVF6.6
there are two required S/N's--one for the initial install and the other
for the V5->V6 upgrade.
--
--
dpb
...
> ... In my (probably pretty typical) path from DVF6.5 to CVF6.6
> there are two required S/N's...
Ooops...that, of course was intended to be from DVF5.0 to CVF6.6...
--
Luka Djigas
Not to mention that there were additional upgrades from cvf 6.6 to
6.6c (three of them, 6.6. to 6.6a, then to 6.6b and ...)
I have those on an installation cd. I don't know what are the
licencing terms, but if we're not breaking any, since they are not
available for download any more (well, not anywhere that i could find)
contact me, and i'll send them by mail if you're interested.
I remember that the c upgrade usually gives some trouble while
installing. Never figured out why.
Best regards
Luka
Jan Gerrit Kootstra
I just looked at the Fedex website, they charge about $190 for shipping.
Do still want me to look for the software or would you go for IVF?
I could contact Intel Germany for you to ask whether or not your Power
flow would compile with IVF.
What are the version number and release number of your Power flow, is it
a Siemens product?
James Giles
...
>>>> I have one, V6.6 Profesional. I do not use it anymore, but I am
>>>> afraid that it might not install anymore due to license experation.
>> I warn you, I live in the Netherlands, so shipping might cost you a
>> couple of Dollars.
> I just looked at the Fedex website, they charge about $190 for
> shipping.
That seems kind of steep to me. Does the thing have to be
sent Fedex? International mail (from me to the Netherlands)
for a flat envelope is less than $25 (for a whole pound: about
.45 Kg). Unless you're also planning to send the printed books
(which, as I recall, are all on the CD anyway). Is shipping
the other way around that much more costly?
If it's really only a few CD's, the postal cost would be about
$12 to $15 since they couldn't weigh a whole pound...
--
J. Giles
"I conclude that there are two ways of constructing a software
design: One way is to make it so simple that there are obviously
no deficiencies and the other way is to make it so complicated
that there are no obvious deficiencies." -- C. A. R. Hoare
"Simplicity is prerequisite for reliability" -- E. W. Dijkstra
Gary Scott
> Jan Gerrit Kootstra wrote:
> ...
>
>>>>>I have one, V6.6 Profesional. I do not use it anymore, but I am
>>>>>afraid that it might not install anymore due to license experation.
>
> ...
>
>>>I warn you, I live in the Netherlands, so shipping might cost you a
>>>couple of Dollars.
>
> ...
>
>>I just looked at the Fedex website, they charge about $190 for
>>shipping.
>
>
>
> That seems kind of steep to me. Does the thing have to be
> sent Fedex? International mail (from me to the Netherlands)
> for a flat envelope is less than $25 (for a whole pound: about
> .45 Kg). Unless you're also planning to send the printed books
> (which, as I recall, are all on the CD anyway). Is shipping
> the other way around that much more costly?
>
> If it's really only a few CD's, the postal cost would be about
> $12 to $15 since they couldn't weigh a whole pound...
>
I received an I/O board all the way from Thailand recently for $6. Of
course it took a really slow boat.
sgian...@gmail.com
I have a CVF PRO (with IMSL) 6.6 upgraded to 6.6 c3 (the last ever
CVF). Since I do not use it anymore I can make it
available should the transaction with the previous poster not succeed.
You can also contact me in PVT
Kind Regards
Simone
dpb
But the upgrade from those was not a for-charge upgrade and thus didn't
require a S/N for the install was what I was trying to get at. From
DVF5 to CVF6.6c only required the two S/Ns--one for the initial V5
install and the second for the CVF6.0/1(?) upgrade (at least the path I
followed which I would think pretty typical as noted).
The free upgrades are still available at the HP site and the links were
posted here not too long ago. I've not had any problem w/ any of the
update installs (at least that weren't handled by answers in the FAQ).
I thought I had bookmarked the previous link but don't seem to have it
at hand...
--
Jan Gerrit Kootstra
> James Giles wrote:
>
>> Jan Gerrit Kootstra wrote:
>> ...
>>
>>>>>> I have one, V6.6 Profesional. I do not use it anymore, but I am
>>>>>> afraid that it might not install anymore due to license experation.
>>
>>
>> ...
>>
>>>> I warn you, I live in the Netherlands, so shipping might cost you a
>>>> couple of Dollars.
>>
>>
>> ...
>>
>>> I just looked at the Fedex website, they charge about $190 for
>>> shipping.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> That seems kind of steep to me. Does the thing have to be
>> sent Fedex? International mail (from me to the Netherlands)
>> for a flat envelope is less than $25 (for a whole pound: about
>> .45 Kg). Unless you're also planning to send the printed books
>> (which, as I recall, are all on the CD anyway). Is shipping
>> the other way around that much more costly?
>>
>> If it's really only a few CD's, the postal cost would be about
>> $12 to $15 since they couldn't weigh a whole pound...
>>
> I received an I/O board all the way from Thailand recently for $6. Of
> course it took a really slow boat.
>
The Dutch mail (TNT) charges $27, but they do not garanty delivery on a
specific date.
So you are right that shipping can be cheaper.
Gary Scott
I'd say $6 is not only cheaper, its amazing. :)
>
>
> Kind regards,
>
>
> Jan Gerrit Kootstra
Jan Gerrit Kootstra
Dear Delyn,
Was unable to recover the cd's, due to moving to another house the cd's
have been moved from it's original place and we were unable to find them.
I hope someelse can provide them to you.
Gary Scott
I'd have been in tears...:)
>
> I hope someelse can provide them to you.
>
>
> Kind regards,
>
>
> Jan Gerrit Kootstra
delyn
It looks like the previous poster does not have it. What would you
sell it for?
Delyn
glen herrmannsfeldt
(snip)
> I'd say $6 is not only cheaper, its amazing. :)
As many readers are in the US, the USPS has
a Priority Mail International Flat-Rate envelope.
That costs US$11.95 to most countries, for 6-10
days delivery. It is a pretty good sized
envelope, with the flat rate good for up to four pounds.
(about 1.8kg for the rest of the world)
-- glen
Terence
udgraded CVF compiler is of course, the man who worked and advised on
it; Steve Lionel.
The problems is: Steve moved with the compiler, to Intel and therefore
has tp support Intel's replacement version by NOT telling you how to
do this in a public Forum.
You could always, of course try writing to any of the previous support
group addresses and/or personnel.
I use CVF 6.6c myself, on top of an early MS Visual Studio.
It's a bit finicky to get all the option settings right, but I never
had problems with results of this compiler, other than not ever being
able to get RS232C ports to work the way I was accustomed.
Terence
dpb
...
> The problems is: Steve moved with the compiler, to Intel ...
IIUC, Steve and the compiler group moved; the compiler itself stayed
behind w/ Compaq/HP.
--
Richard Maine
> The problems is: Steve moved with the compiler, to Intel and therefore
> has tp support Intel's replacement version by NOT telling you how to
> do this in a public Forum.
I'll stand up for him by saying that this is completely unjustifiably
insulting to Steve. Steve has *NEVER ONCE* given even a hint of
deliberately refusing to help people in order to steer them to buying
products from Intel. To the contrary, he has been unfailingly helpful,
patient, and cool, even in the face of quite severe provocation, for
many times longer than you have been on this newsgroup. I realize that
you have been in the Fortran business for a long time, but you are very
much a newcomer to this newsgroup compared to Steve. I consider Steve an
example to emulate. I try, but I'm not as good at it as he is. I have
plenty of times seen Steve specifically give help to people using
products from his competitors.
Speculating based on projecting your own notions of how you might expect
to act in his place might say something about you, but it doesn't say
anything about Steve.
As an aside, I would have expected you to understand how far removed
from marketting issues a developer such as he is in a big corporation
like Intel. Even if I hadn't seen enough from Steve over the years to be
able to evaluate his replies directly, I'd have realized that he has no
particular reason to be pushing sales of Intel products. He's not on
commission or otherwise directly judged on product sales.
Besides which, I am confident that he has helped Intel compiler sales
better by projecting the helpful image that he does than he would have
by acting the pushy sales droid. The memory is vague and possibly
faulty, but I think I recall once being asked to give an outside
evaluation of Steve, and saying something much along those lines.
Note that failing to spend multiple hours trying to research a problem
that he can't answer off the top of his head is not at all the same
thing as deliberately refusing to help for marketting reasons.
--
Richard Maine | Good judgement comes from experience;
email: last name at domain . net | experience comes from bad judgement.
domain: summertriangle | -- Mark Twain
Gary Scott
> The person who knows the answers to the problem of re-installing an
> udgraded CVF compiler is of course, the man who worked and advised on
> it; Steve Lionel.
>
> The problems is: Steve moved with the compiler, to Intel and therefore
> has tp support Intel's replacement version by NOT telling you how to
> do this in a public Forum.
I don't think theres any prohibition. I've seen him explain such things
before. It's probably includes a bit of relationship to the fact that
it's an obsolete product and he gets tired of answering the same old
questions for an obsolete product. The intel forum is still a good
place to ask these questions. After all, many if not most clinging to
CVF will eventually transition to IVF at some point. So there is still
incentive.
>
> You could always, of course try writing to any of the previous support
> group addresses and/or personnel.
>
> I use CVF 6.6c myself, on top of an early MS Visual Studio.
> It's a bit finicky to get all the option settings right, but I never
> had problems with results of this compiler, other than not ever being
> able to get RS232C ports to work the way I was accustomed.
Steve Lionel
Correct, though the source code for CVF also moved to Intel.
--
Steve Lionel
Developer Products Division
Intel Corporation
Nashua, NH
For email address, replace "invalid" with "com"
User communities for Intel Software Development Products
http://softwareforums.intel.com/
Intel Fortran Support
http://support.intel.com/support/performancetools/fortran
My Fortran blog
http://www.intel.com/software/drfortran
Steve Lionel
>The person who knows the answers to the problem of re-installing an
>udgraded CVF compiler is of course, the man who worked and advised on
>it; Steve Lionel.
>
>The problems is: Steve moved with the compiler, to Intel and therefore
>has tp support Intel's replacement version by NOT telling you how to
>do this in a public Forum.
Terence, I find that statement quite offensive as well as wildly inaccurate.
Richard Maine explained it well and I will not elaborate.
I am glad to help people with CVF issues if it seems important and I can do so
easily. In this thread, the side question about installing upgrades did not
rise above that threshold, and I was quite busy all last week, representing
Intel at the Fortran standards committee meeting. Sure, I'd prefer that
people buy Intel Fortran but I don't have a problem with those who, for
whatever reason, need or want to continue using CVF it it does what they want.
Anyone who reads our user forum will recognize that.
There is no single answer to how CVF upgrades worked. In general, the
"upgrade" parts that came on CD, if they did not find the old version
installed, would prompt for the serial number of an older *eligible* version.
This was true for any upgrades that came in a box with a manual, etc. An
exception was a special 6.5 upgrade that was sold through Programmer's
Paradise as an upgrade to 6.0 or 6.1. That one did require that the old
version be installed. Downloadable updates (e.g. 6.6C) always require the
previous version be installed, since they are patches, not complete installs.
>You could always, of course try writing to any of the previous support
>group addresses and/or personnel.
You would not succeed in this. The old email addresses are turned off and
nobody who provided that support still works for HP.
dpb
> On Tue, 19 Aug 2008 19:02:20 -0500, dpb <no...@non.net> wrote:
...
>> IIUC, Steve and the compiler group moved; the compiler itself stayed
>> behind w/ Compaq/HP.
>
> Correct, though the source code for CVF also moved to Intel.
That part I didn't know...I had presumed "the compiler" staying implied
the source as well. I guess that pretty effectively limited the HP
chances for support/development/upgrades or did they get to fork the source?
--
Gary Scott
There were early rumors that HP might be considering continuing active
development of CVF for a period. I don't know whether that was real or
whether it would have violated some contractual obligations.
>
> --
Steve Lionel
wrote:
>dpb wrote:
>
>> Steve Lionel wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, 19 Aug 2008 19:02:20 -0500, dpb <no...@non.net> wrote:
>>
>> ...
>>
>>>> IIUC, Steve and the compiler group moved; the compiler itself stayed
>>>> behind w/ Compaq/HP.
>>>
>>>
>>> Correct, though the source code for CVF also moved to Intel.
>>
>> ...
>> That part I didn't know...I had presumed "the compiler" staying implied
>> the source as well. I guess that pretty effectively limited the HP
>> chances for support/development/upgrades or did they get to fork the
>> source?
>
>There were early rumors that HP might be considering continuing active
>development of CVF for a period. I don't know whether that was real or
>whether it would have violated some contractual obligations.
Not a chance. That was just wishful thinking on someone's part. There was
never any consideration given to this by HP and it would not have been
possible even if they wanted to do so.
The original plan, agreed to by Compaq (this was before HP bough them) was
that CVF sales would end when IVF started shipping in 2003. HP chose to
continue CVF sales for about a year and a half afterward, even though they had
no support resources behind it. They did end sales in late 2004 and formally
ended support in June 2005.
HP did (and does) have developers continuing to maintain the OpenVMS Alpha
compiler, which was based on a common "front end" with CVF. Intel provided HP
with bug fixes (but not enhancements) to the common code, but that has since
ended. The "GEM" code generator used by CVF and the Alpha compilers stayed
with Compaq/HP, though most of the GEM developers moved to Intel.
I understand this is confusing for many. Even today we (Intel) get requests
from customers who want to buy CVF licenses from us. We have no legal right
to do so - ownership of the CVF product remained with Compaq (HP). Similarly,
DEC had no right to sell additional PowerStation licenses (and in that case,
DVF was DEC's compiler and not based on Microsoft's.)
dpb
...
> I understand this is confusing for many. ...
Ah, the machinations of business... :)
Interesting view of a bit of the "inside scoop" Steve, thanks...
--
Steve Lionel
Oh, and to the OP's original question, when IVF was first released in 2003 we
did have a discount program for upgrades from CVF, but that ended many years
ago, It's now been nearly five years since IVF started shipping and seven
years since the last CVF version (6.6)
Gary Scott
> On Thu, 21 Aug 2008 14:03:02 -0500, dpb <no...@non.net> wrote:
>
>
>>Steve Lionel wrote:
>>...
>>
>>>I understand this is confusing for many. ...
>>
>>Ah, the machinations of business... :)
>>
>>Interesting view of a bit of the "inside scoop" Steve, thanks...
>
>
> Oh, and to the OP's original question, when IVF was first released in 2003 we
> did have a discount program for upgrades from CVF, but that ended many years
> ago, It's now been nearly five years since IVF started shipping and seven
> years since the last CVF version (6.6)
...and it seems like just yesterday, we were excitedly clamboring for
the arrival of our first version of DVF 5.
> --
> Steve Lionel
> Developer Products Division
> Intel Corporation
> Nashua, NH
>
> For email address, replace "invalid" with "com"
>
> User communities for Intel Software Development Products
> http://softwareforums.intel.com/
> Intel Fortran Support
> http://support.intel.com/support/performancetools/fortran
> My Fortran blog
> http://www.intel.com/software/drfortran
dpb
...
> ...and it seems like just yesterday, we were excitedly clamboring for
> the arrival of our first version of DVF 5.
Yes, although your group may have been more athletic/agile/physical, we
were merely "clamoring" where I was at the time... <VBG>
--
Gary Scott
:p
>
> --
Gib Bogle
> On Thu, 21 Aug 2008 14:03:02 -0500, dpb <no...@non.net> wrote:
>
>> Steve Lionel wrote:
>> ...
>>> I understand this is confusing for many. ...
>> Ah, the machinations of business... :)
>>
>> Interesting view of a bit of the "inside scoop" Steve, thanks...
>
> Oh, and to the OP's original question, when IVF was first released in 2003 we
> did have a discount program for upgrades from CVF, but that ended many years
> ago, It's now been nearly five years since IVF started shipping and seven
> years since the last CVF version (6.6)
> --
> Steve Lionel
The interesting question, to me, is: how much of CVF went into IVF?
Steve Lionel
> The interesting question, to me, is: how much of CVF went into IVF?
All of the "front end" (language parsing and Fortran semantics), all of
the libraries except the math library, all the provided modules, all the
documentation, and small bits of the supporting structure that
interfaced to the code generator. The big change was the code
generator, which was Intel's, and its supporting libraries including
REAL*16 and OpenMP support.
Steve Lionel
>
> ...and it seems like just yesterday, we were excitedly clamboring for
> the arrival of our first version of DVF 5.
Well, I remember some users denigrating DVF and saying that it would
never replace Microsoft Fortran PowerStation in their hearts. Most of
them eventually came around, though I recall one guy who took several
years to do so...
Gary Scott
> Gary Scott wrote:
>
>>
>> ...and it seems like just yesterday, we were excitedly clamboring for
>> the arrival of our first version of DVF 5.
>
>
> Well, I remember some users denigrating DVF and saying that it would
> never replace Microsoft Fortran PowerStation in their hearts.
I recall being quite angry that MS would abandon the market, but I was
never very happy with the arms length support either.
> Most of
> them eventually came around, though I recall one guy who took several
> years to do so...
>
--
Gary Scott
Terence
Steve Lionel wrote:
> Terence, I find that statement quite offensive as well as wildly inaccurate.
> Richard Maine explained it well and I will not elaborate.
I just got to read this. I'm sorry I am late responding.
There was no intention of implying (which I don't think I did), that
Steve would refuse to help.
That would be very unllikely of me since I have about 30 private notes
form Steve in trying help me with the CVF/DVF compiler and also with
the later Intel Version 9 (which I didn't manage to install). So just
the opposite from my own experience!
The form of my words were meant to suggest that Steve now worked for
another compiler manufacturer (Intel) distinct from Compaq or Digital,
and it might become difficult for him to officially advise on re-
installing a second-hand compiler from his previous company on
someone else's computer.
My guess was that he would not respond to the postings, (which seemed
to have happened, see above), until someone else started to stir
things
Therfore I hinted that writing privately and not to the Forum might
produce results - and I meant, from Steve himself!!
To Steve: I'm sorry you interpreted my words that way. Two of my
previous professions were as as editor of a scientific (and precise)
journal, and one as active director of a newpaper. I also wrote a
guide to London. I thought that apart from typos on this tiny screen,
my use of words was exact.
There was nothing "widely inaccurate" in MY words, only those put in
my mouth.
I got the details of where the person and compiler were, correctly. No
other statement was declarative1.
Richard Maine
> Steve Lionel wrote:
>
> > Terence, I find that statement quite offensive as well as wildly inaccurate.
> > Richard Maine explained it well and I will not elaborate.
> There was nothing "widely inaccurate" in MY words, only those put in
> my mouth.
> I got the details of where the person and compiler were, correctly. No
> other statement was declarative1.
The exact words directly from your "mouth" (or keyboard) to which I was
replying were
>>> Steve moved with the compiler, to Intel and therefore
>>> has tp support Intel's replacement version by NOT telling you how to
>>> do this in a public Forum.
The part about "and therefore has to support Intel's replacement version
by NOT telling you how to do this in a public forum" are the specific
words objected to. They seem distinctly wildly inaccurate in that he
does not have to do (or not do) any such thing, regardless of whether it
is a public forum or not. I don't know what not being declarative means
in this context. I started to speculate, but that seems like the wrong
thing to do. Anyway, regardless of whether they are "declarative" or
not, those exact words are wildly inaccurate and offensive, without need
of putting any others in your mouth.
As long as we are talking about exact words, I seriously doubt that
Intel or most other vendors ever "officially advise" (your exact words)
anything on this forum, regardles of whether it is for Intel products or
not. Intel has an official support forum, but this is not it. THat has
been made pretty explicit more than once.
Terence
Richard Maine wrote:
> As long as we are talking about exact words, I seriously doubt that
> Intel or most other vendors ever "officially advise" (your exact words)
> anything on this forum, regardles of whether it is for Intel products or
> not. Intel has an official support forum, but this is not it. THat has
> been made pretty explicit more than once.
That was my point! I DID NOT say that Steve would not respond, but
that he would be unlikely to respond publicly in this Forum, if at
all. And Steve did NOT address the problem even when he responded to
your unwanted comment as to my intentions.
I think this proves my point.
If Steve had responded to the OP posting with an explantion as how do
do this re-installation, of a replaced and now unsupported product,
his very recognisable name and afiliation would have caused
conflicting interpretations to persons reading the postings as to
Intel's position.
Remember these are all licensed products.
Would he be responding as a private person? In his position I would
have written privately to the poster with the problem; but I would
have no idea if he had done so and thererefore suggested to the OP
what to do, HINTING that Steve might be approached privately.
After all he wrote to me privately, interested in solving situations
with a product he was very connected with.
Please comment on Fortran and not my supposed intentions.
Steve Lionel
> That was my point! I DID NOT say that Steve would not respond, but
> that he would be unlikely to respond publicly in this Forum, if at
> all. And Steve did NOT address the problem even when he responded to
> your unwanted comment as to my intentions.
> I think this proves my point.
I am not sure which "problem" you're referring to. The OP asked how to
buy a copy of CVF - that's something I have no information on.
> If Steve had responded to the OP posting with an explantion as how do
> do this re-installation, of a replaced and now unsupported product,
> his very recognisable name and afiliation would have caused
> conflicting interpretations to persons reading the postings as to
> Intel's position.
> Remember these are all licensed products.
Another reader had already answered that, correctly, by the time I saw
this thread. If Intel cares whether or not I offer advice on CVF here,
they have yet to indicate such to me. Please do not go inventing
spurious motivations on my behalf or Intel's.
Please also do not read anything at all into lack of a response from me
to any particular topic in this newsgroup. Heaven forbid that I might go
on vacation sometime! (What will you do when I finally take the 8-week
sabbatical I'm now eligible for? :-) ) Seriously, I do not read each
and every post here and may miss a thread where someone is, for some
reason, expecting me to respond. If you want to hear from me, send me
an email. (But be aware that if I am on vacation, you will not hear
from me until I return.) Or better, post a question in our user forum,
as that has coverage by our support team.