[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       pcc-list
Subject:    Re: [Pcc] Status of non-C parts
From:       Steve Kargl <sgk () troutmask ! apl ! washington ! edu>
Date:       2014-12-19 17:18:27
Message-ID: 20141219171827.GA5707 () troutmask ! apl ! washington ! edu
[Download RAW message or body]

On Fri, Dec 19, 2014 at 05:58:05PM +0100, Michael Rock wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> > The Fortran part is broken and requires a bit of
> > work to catch up to internal changes within pcc.
> > Also note that the runtime library needs quite abit
> > of TLC.
> 
> That would be possible, if need be. There is still an awful lot of f77
> code running around still being in use. These old dinosaurs need a
> direct meteor strike to die.
>  
> > IMHO, I believe that the Fortran parts should be
> > removed.  Fortran 77 is now 4 standards behind the
> > most current standard.  With the exception of 
> > Fortran code hosted on Netlib, most Fortran code
> > written today has some Fortran 90, 95, 2003, or
> > 2008 feature not found in pcc's f77.
> > 
> 
> So maybe it is better to get f2c up to the job?
> 

If you need Fortran 77 today, f2c would be a better choice than
pcc's f77.  However, f2c is also a Fortran 77 (with some common
extensions).  If you really need a more modern Fortran compiler,
use gfortran*.

* Full disclosure:  I've been a gfortran contributor/maintainer
for a decade or so.

-- 
Steve
_______________________________________________
Pcc mailing list
Pcc@lists.ludd.ltu.se
https://lists.ludd.ltu.se/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pcc
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]