Re: Where is the elusive jump command?

[Gary Scott <Gary.L.Scott@lmtas.lmco.com>]

Gautier wrote:
> 
> Robert Dewar wrote:
> 
> > The percentage of Fortran code currently written using Fortran
> > 95 is small. Furthermore, I have seen a lot of Fortran 95 code
> > which is still very much in old style.
> 
> A reason is the huge mass of <= 77 Fortran code in place.
> An engineer will have to re-work, expand an exisiting Fortran 77
> code and often will (re-)learn programming in that activity
> by imitation of the existing code.
> Another reason is that the "modern" features (90+) are not
> very intuitive to the eye - a sort of over-verbose C syntax
> with contorsions to keep compatibility with Fortran 77.

More bunk.  Most of the "modern" features of Fortran 90/95 were borrowed
from Ada and Modula.  And many areas are less-verbose than Ada, but
certainly less cryptic than C.


> Would I have to program in Fortran, I would stick to the
> 77 syntax which is relatively simple and readable with
> many modern structures. It is already somewhat difficult
> to keep a minimal security with 77 (E.g. forgetting "implicit none",
> headaches with the variable visibility, "common"s & Co).
> For bigger or new programs, or more complex data structures the best
> to do is to acquire/download an Ada95 compiler and use f2a.pl to
> translate parts.
> ______________________________________________________
> Gautier  --  http://members.xoom.com/gdemont/gsoft.htm