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,FREEMAIL_FROM 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!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!newscon06.news.prodigy.com!prodigy.net!newsfeed-00.mathworks.com!lon-transit.news.telstra.net!lon-in.news.telstra.net!news.telstra.net!news-server.bigpond.net.au!53ab2750!not-for-mail From: "robin" Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.fortran,comp.lang.pl1 References: <0ugu4e.4i7.ln@hunter.axlog.fr> <%P_cg.155733$eR6.26337@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net> <6H9dg.10258$S7.9150@news-server.bigpond.net.au> <1hfv5wb.1x4ab1tbdzk7eN%nospam@see.signature> Subject: Re: Ada vs Fortran for scientific applications X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Message-ID: Date: Fri, 26 May 2006 02:58:28 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 144.134.49.90 X-Complaints-To: abuse@bigpond.net.au X-Trace: news-server.bigpond.net.au 1148612308 144.134.49.90 (Fri, 26 May 2006 12:58:28 EST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 26 May 2006 12:58:28 EST Organization: BigPond Internet Services Xref: g2news2.google.com comp.lang.ada:4484 comp.lang.fortran:10278 comp.lang.pl1:1730 Date: 2006-05-26T02:58:28+00:00 List-Id: "Richard Maine" wrote in message news:1hfv5wb.1x4ab1tbdzk7eN%nospam@see.signature... > Nasser Abbasi wrote: > > > I just did this simple test, declare an array and go overbound and see if we > > get a run-time error: > ... > > $ g95 f.f90 > ... > > $ <------------------- NO runtime ERROR > > This part of the thread has started drifting away from relevance to much > of anything, but that particular sample is just drifting yet further. It > illustrates neither much about subscript bounds rules being part of the > language nor about bounds checking being part of the language, Oh inded it does. Subscript checking is not part of the Fortran language. That a particular Fortran compiler provides subscript checking or does not provide it is irrelevant. > As with most compilers, g95 does have a bounds check option; it just > isn't enabled by default. That's irrelevant to the discussion. It isn't something that's defined in the language. > Gives me: > > At line 4 of file clf.f90 > Traceback: not available, compile with -ftrace=frame or -ftrace=full Actually now that you mention it, a traceback is another thing that PL/I provides, via the SNAP source option. (It's part of the language)