SCIENTIFIC-LINUX-USERS Archives

November 2011

SCIENTIFIC-LINUX-USERS@LISTSERV.FNAL.GOV

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Nico Kadel-Garcia <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Nico Kadel-Garcia <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Thu, 3 Nov 2011 00:41:40 -0400
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (19 lines)
On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 9:28 PM, Martin Helm <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Am Montag, 31. Oktober 2011, 22:11:24 schrieb Nico Kadel-Garcia:
>>
>> I'll second this. The "gcc-gfortran" tools are based on the old "f2c"
>> toolkit, designed to turn Fortran code into C code and then compile
>> *that*. The result is surprisingly stable, standards compliant, and
>> effective at dealing with old code and old projects.
>
> That is not completely correct. gfortran is not based in any way on f2c and
> does not convert any fortran code to intermediate C (which is what f2c
> did/does). It is a full Fortran 77/90/95 compiler, almost fully 2003 compliant
> (including the ISO_C bindinings) and has some features of Fortran 2008
> (depends on the version you use) and the usual GNU extensions.

Oh? Let me look...... Son of a gun. gcc *used* to use f2c for Fortran
compilation. It was in gcc-3.x, which is the default compiler for
Scientific Linux 4.  and still in production use. So my claim is out
of date and only valid on older systems. Thanks for the update.

ATOM RSS1 RSS2