From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: 103376,c4cb2c432feebd9d
X-Google-Thread: 1094ba,c4cb2c432feebd9d
X-Google-Thread: 101deb,15c6ed4b761968e6
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,gid1094ba,gid101deb,public
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news2.google.com!news4.google.com!news.glorb.com!news.hub.org!sn-xt-sjc-03!sn-xt-sjc-07!sn-post-sjc-01!supernews.com!corp.supernews.com!not-for-mail
From: "Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz" <spamtrap@library.lspace.org.invalid>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.fortran,comp.lang.pl1
Subject: Re: Ada vs Fortran for scientific applications
Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 07:42:33 -0300
Organization: Atid/2
Message-ID: <4475982a$9$fuzhry+tra$mr2ice@news.patriot.net>
References: <mubcg.13522$fb2.853@newssvr27.news.prodigy.net>
      <epcs4e.qb8.ln@hunter.axlog.fr>
      <tHkcg.6937$kR6.484@trnddc05>
      <0ugu4e.4i7.ln@hunter.axlog.fr>
      <PkHcg.90575$Fs1.7198@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>
      <To_cg.10095$S7.4017@news-server.bigpond.net.au>
      <%P_cg.155733$eR6.26337@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>
      <6H9dg.10258$S7.9150@news-server.bigpond.net.au>
      <XVadg.76594$_S7.45873@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com>
      <1hfv5wb.1x4ab1tbdzk7eN%nospam@see.signature>
Mail-Copies-To: nobody
X-CompuServe-Customer: Yes
X-Coriate: interspeed.co.nz
X-Ecrate: tanandtanlawyers.com
X-Pose: George Cox
X-Punge: Micro$oft
X-Sanguinate: The MVS Guy
X-Terminate: SPA(GIS)
X-Tinguish: Mark Griffith
X-Treme: C&C,DWS
X-Newsreader: MR/2 Internet Cruiser Edition for OS/2 v2.67/60 
X-Complaints-To: abuse@supernews.com
Xref: g2news2.google.com comp.lang.ada:4457 comp.lang.fortran:10239
 comp.lang.pl1:1706
Date: 2006-05-25T07:42:33-03:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

In <1hfv5wb.1x4ab1tbdzk7eN%nospam@see.signature>, on 05/24/2006
   at 11:04 PM, nospam@see.signature (Richard Maine) said:

>As with most compilers, g95 does have a bounds check option; it just
>isn't enabled by default.

If the language semantics require checking then that is a compiler
bug. In the case of PL/I, the programmer can use (SUBSCRIPTRANGE) and
(NOSUBSCRIPTRANGE) to control array bounds checking, and would be
justifiably upset if the compiler ignored the requests. The same
applies to string bounds checking, with different condition prefixes.

-- 
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT  <http://patriot.net/~shmuel>

Unsolicited bulk E-mail subject to legal action.  I reserve the
right to publicly post or ridicule any abusive E-mail.  Reply to
domain Patriot dot net user shmuel+news to contact me.  Do not
reply to spamtrap@library.lspace.org