Re: fortran 90 compiler for linux
- From: "James Van Buskirk" <not_valid@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2005 10:40:00 -0600
<beliavsky@xxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1121425918.342968.85660@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> I don't know of any outstanding bugs in the Lahey/Fujitsu Fortran 95
> compiler for Windows, version 7.1 in implementing the Fortran 95
> standard. The few complaints I have seen about LF95 in this newsgroup
> concern some Technical Reports that followed the F95 standard. I wonder
> if anyone has a counterexample.
I have seen sufficient bugs in previous versions to be fairly sure
that the bugs must be there in the current version. What does LF95 7.1
do about
http://home.comcast.net/~kmbtib/Fortran_stuff/elem_assign.f90
for example? If you use any compiler as your primary development
compiler for a while you are going to encounter bugs. The f95
standard itself has bugs and internal contradictions and I have
no idea how you could create a standard for which this would not
be the case. How can you write a bug-free compiler to an
inconsistent standard?
--
write(*,*) transfer((/17.392111325966148d0,6.5794487871554595D-85, &
6.0134700243160014d-154/),(/'x'/)); end
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: fortran 90 compiler for linux
- From: Paul Van Delst
- Re: fortran 90 compiler for linux
- References:
- fortran 90 compiler for linux
- From: Steve . Morris
- Re: fortran 90 compiler for linux
- From: Chris Hulbert
- Re: fortran 90 compiler for linux
- From: Ken Plotkin
- Re: fortran 90 compiler for linux
- From: Walt Brainerd
- Re: fortran 90 compiler for linux
- From: beliavsky
- fortran 90 compiler for linux
- Prev by Date: !!!--- Evoluption Mouse ---!!!
- Next by Date: Re: Assumed shape array help
- Previous by thread: Re: fortran 90 compiler for linux
- Next by thread: Re: fortran 90 compiler for linux
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|