Re: IVF vs CVF
From: Gary L. Scott (garyscott_at_ev1.net)
Date: 12/21/03
- Next message: John Humble: "Printer control from Fortran"
- Previous message: Sheldon Simms: "Re: c04 ready to be checked"
- In reply to: Tim Prince: "Re: IVF vs CVF"
- Next in thread: Ken Plotkin: "Re: IVF vs CVF"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Sun, 21 Dec 2003 10:30:13 -0600
Tim Prince wrote:
>
> "Gary L. Scott" <garyscott@ev1.net> wrote in message
> news:3FE46EF0.10FC3D52@ev1.net...
> > Jack Berkery wrote:
> > >
> > > Is Compaq Visual Fortran going to be discontinued soon and do I have to
> > > migrate over to Intel VF? My projects all have CVF 6.6B with MSVC++ (but
> not
> > > .NET). Is moving to the new Intel release going to be an easy
> transition?
> > >
> >
> > It will be a major pain if you don't have MSVC and don't want it (I
> > already have Borland C and Absoft C (and MS QuickC), I don't need
> > MSVC). It may be suitable if you don't happen to mind that you now have
> > to buy two products to get the same functionality of CVF (or if you
> > already have the required version of MSVC). I'd much rather pay more
> > and have a properly integrated product like CVF.
> If you're interested in this subject, you should go back over Steve Lionel's
> explanations. I would paraphrase part of it as: Microsoft didn't accept
> extension of the CVF style integration, under the current circumstances.
> Steve explained that buying the cut-down MSVC++ .net from your favorite
> discount supplier gives you the command line functionality with Intel
> Fortran for a lower price than CVF. Intel could not provide compatibility
> with Microsoft C in any more effective way, and that is considered a
> necessity for a commercial compiler. Further, Steve explained that HPQ has
> taken back responsibility for CVF, not discontinued it. Where they'll go
> with it is unknown.
> You can see in the Salford and Lahey compilers the furthest Microsoft was
> willing to go toward accepting the needs of the Fortran community into
> current VS. Among the tradeoffs, as I understand it, is that debugging
> can't be done with native compiled Fortran code, only with CLR. I myself
> would prefer to do it that way, if forced to develop CLR code.
> I had to struggle through the installation of VS .net the last 2 days. It
> certainly has doubtful payback, if all you want is Fortran command line.
> It's not clear at first go that you don't actually have to install IIS web
> server and additional security patches etc. OTOH, there's not much point in
> trying to maintain compatibility with obsoleted Microsoft software.
> I continue to run several varieties of Windows Fortran under cygwin, so I
> have CVF 6.6C, Intel 7.1 and 8.0, and g77, plus linux with Intel 6.0.1, 7.1,
> 8.0 all installed on one P4.
> > Support the GNU Fortran G95 Project: http://g95.sourceforge.net
> yes, I have 2 installations of g95.
> And, I certainly don't speak for my employer.
Thanks Tim. Yes, I remember the explanation but it doesn't make me any
happier. At some point, I will have to make a decision. It most
certainly will not be to choose a compiler that does not support native
code generation. It may also, depending on how useful/widespread .NET
becomes, require the option to produce .NET applications (both project
types supported). Since there is a GINO.NET for Salford (I haven't
fully evaluated what that means exactly), I'm presently leaning in that
direction, but am far from making a decision.
Some of my criteria (not really that difficult I would think):
1) Must be a GINO library available for it.
2) High quality compiler, good support, free email support within
reason.
3) Integrated with MS Visual Studio or a comparable IDE (must
additionally support my preferred text editor as a "plugin", automated
"resource" management, icon editor, project management, etc.).
4) No requirement for any other compiler purchase (e.g. MS VC).
5) If .NET supported, must also be capable of generating direct, highly
optimized native code.
-- Gary Scott mailto:garyscott@ev1.net Fortran Library http://www.fortranlib.com Support the GNU Fortran G95 Project: http://g95.sourceforge.net
- Next message: John Humble: "Printer control from Fortran"
- Previous message: Sheldon Simms: "Re: c04 ready to be checked"
- In reply to: Tim Prince: "Re: IVF vs CVF"
- Next in thread: Ken Plotkin: "Re: IVF vs CVF"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|
