This is the mail archive of the fortran@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GNU Fortran project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: revap.types ,step 1

From: Tobias Schlüter <tobias dot schlueter at physik dot uni-muenchen dot de>
To: Steve Kargl <sgk at troutmask dot apl dot washington dot edu>
Cc: Ron Young <ronyoung at adelphia dot net>, fortran at gcc dot gnu dot org
Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 14:01:05 +0200
Subject: Re: revap.types ,step 1
References: <KDEHIOGDKGKPNBLBLINJEECDCEAA.ronyoung@adelphia.net> <20040828051937.GA73642@troutmask.apl.washington.edu>

Steve Kargl wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 27, 2004 at 05:32:10PM -0700, Ron Young wrote:
> 
>>As far as the F77 standard goes, the real standard is F77 with Vax
>>extensions.
> 
> 
> I'm simply speechless.
> 

Why? Given the amount of requests for extensions to Fortran 77, I think it's
valid to assume that most people do indeed not stick to ANSI FORTRAN 77. It is
disputable that the VAX set of extensions is *the* common set of extensions,
but I don't think this claim is so far removed from reality.

Actually, there's another common standard for Fortran 77 besides ANSI, namely
MIl-STD 1753, but I think these extensions have all found their way into
Fortran 90, and should therefore be supported already.

- Tobi

Follow-Ups:
- Re: revap.types ,step 1
  - From: Steve Kargl
- Re: revap.types ,step 1
  - From: Toon Moene

References:
- RE: revap.types ,step 1
  - From: Ron Young
- Re: revap.types ,step 1
  - From: Steve Kargl

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]