Forums before death by AOL, social media and spammers... "We can't have nice things"
|    comp.lang.fortran    |    Putting John Backus on a giant pedestal    |    5,127 messages    |
[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]
|    Message 4,589 of 5,127    |
|    Lynn McGuire to Lawrence D'Oliveiro    |
|    Re: Intel Fortran Help in VS    |
|    26 Jan 24 15:00:18    |
      From: lynnmcguire5@gmail.com              On 1/26/2024 2:50 AM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:       > On Thu, 25 Jan 2024 15:31:51 -0600, Lynn McGuire wrote:       >       >> Much Fortran code was written under the F66 rules until the late 1980s       >> if you supported multiple platforms (we supported ten platforms in the       >> 1980s).       >       > Why did it take vendors so long to catch up to FORTRAN 77?       >       > By the way, I thought the limit on identifier length had been lifted in       > FORTRAN 77, but I was wrong: it took until Fortran 90 to raise the limit       > to 31.       >       >> You can update it to longer names at your own peril.       >       > Why is that still the case? Longer names have been allowed for going back       > about a third of a century now.              I have 780,000 lines of F77 code intermixed with 60,000 lines of C and       C++ code. We have been updating the code to move from our Open Watcom       F77, C, and C++ compilers to the Visual C++ / Intel Fortran combo. We       are making enough broad changes at the moment, thank you. I will pass       on automating variable name changes just to make them longer.              Lynn              --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05        * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)    |
[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]
(c) 1994, bbs@darkrealms.ca