Re: Uninitialized variables

From: Gary L. Scott (garyscott_at_ev1.net)
Date: 04/09/04 

Date: Fri, 09 Apr 2004 14:35:14 -0500

James Giles wrote:
>
> Gary L. Scott wrote:
> > John Appleyard wrote:
> ...
> >> If we could say "use Fortran for your new program, and it is guaranteed
> >> not to crash the O/S, or allow buffer over-runs, or execute in any other
> >> undetermined way", I think that would be a unique and attractive
> >> propostion.
> >
> > It will never happen without 1) additional system-programming features,
> > 2) an address pointer, 3) a standard "graphics" library for workstation
> > targets, 4) all of this at $89.00, 5) a free basic compiler for
> > learning, 6) a concerted effort to change the prevaling attitudes about
> > Fortran.
>
> I can't ever happen if (2) in your list is provided. When the language
> includes address pointers, it is to be expected that buffer overruns and
> other undetermined behaviors will be commonplace errors.

I regularly show here that I'm an idiot (ok, usually its sleep
deprivation) so in order to beat a dead horse I'll go ahead and continue
here. I don't quite see the connection between needing address pointers
because the OS is designed such that it requires you to use them and the
likelihood of additional errors being introduced because of mis- or
over- use of a basic, if error-prone language feature. If you need them
because of other "professional programmer's" insistence on using them in
design of their API, you need them. I'm for facing reality in this case
(but actually it's a moot point since they are provided by all but one
compiler that I use).

Most CS-type programmers that I know seem to feel that address pointers
are an essential component of "system programming" so I actually see my
points 1 and 2 as redundant. I generally agree with your position on
use of them and I limit only to where required by the OS API.

>
> --
> J. Giles 

-- 
Gary Scott
mailto:garyscott@ev1.net
Fortran Library:  http://www.fortranlib.com
Support the Original G95 Project:  http://www.g95.org
-OR-
Support the GNU GFortran Project:  http://gcc.gnu.org/fortran/index.html
Why are there two?  God only knows.
Democracy is two wolves and a sheep, voting on what to eat for dinner...
Liberty is a well armed sheep contesting the vote. - Thomas Jefferson

Relevant Pages

  • Re: A petition to J3 apropos FORTRANs future
    ... James Giles wrote: ... I'm also not abandoning Fortran because of it. ... > specific and not within the scope of a language standard at all. ... Gary Scott ...
    (comp.lang.fortran)
  • Re: A petition to J3 apropos FORTRANs future
    ... James Giles wrote: ... Problem is we define our own data types, which bits are the exponent, ... >> system programming in Fortran. ... Gary Scott ...
    (comp.lang.fortran)
  • Another appeal to James Giles
    ... James Giles wrote: ... > language that their colleagues and management keep pushing them ... presaged the behavior of the Fortran high-priests as they went about ... add a very small contrlled number of features and C-interop and we have ...
    (comp.lang.fortran)
  • Re: F200x (was Re: When to expect a F2003 compiler?)
    ... > James Giles wrote: ... I'm not sure how alive Fortran has ... >> language that their colleagues and management keep pushing them ... > Most, if not all, of the features of Fortran 77 existed in compilers ...
    (comp.lang.fortran)
  • Re: Surprise
    ... haven't seen any Fortran libraries that do that. ... Libraries are a huge part of the reason why one language would be ...
    (comp.lang.fortran)
Loading