Re: what weren't structure/union/map made part of F77/90 ?
- From: nospam@xxxxxxxxxxxxx (Richard Maine)
- Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2005 18:00:18 -0800
Richard E Maine <nospam@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Lynn McGuire <nospam@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > Since the usage of structure / record / ... is so prevalent, why haven't
> > they been added to the fortran standard ?
>
> Well, I'd say because
> [somewhat smart-alecky reply, including...]
> 2. The standard is plenty big enough...
Now that I'm home, a slight elaboration on that one. Adding structure et
al to the standard would be a *BIG* job. That's largely because it would
have to be integrated with everything else, somehow or another. Even if
the integration amounted to saying that it didn't work in conjunction
with something else, that still would have to be said, and someone would
have to figure out all the places where it needed to be said. Skim the
standard for how many places something gets said about derived types.
Not only would it be a lot of places, I think some of them would be
hard. I haven't bothered to think very hard about it, but my off-hand
guess would be that it would not integrate cleanly at all with several
other features - no I don't have, nor do I care to come up with details.
As a vendor feature hanging around several compilers for compatibility
with old code, the vendors in question can get by with just blowing off
questions that would have to be seriously addressed if it were added to
the standard. And if it were added to the standard without decent
integration, intended only to standardize old codes, then that would not
seem like an argument likely to gather much support.
--
Richard Maine | Good judgement comes from experience;
email: last name at domain . net | experience comes from bad judgement.
domain: summertriangle | -- Mark Twain
.
- Follow-Ups:
- References:
- what weren't structure/union/map made part of F77/90 ?
- From: Lynn McGuire
- Re: what weren't structure/union/map made part of F77/90 ?
- From: Richard E Maine
- Re: what weren't structure/union/map made part of F77/90 ?
- From: Lynn McGuire
- Re: what weren't structure/union/map made part of F77/90 ?
- From: Richard E Maine
- what weren't structure/union/map made part of F77/90 ?
- Prev by Date: Re: G95 Trace Back?
- Next by Date: LAPACK & Intel 9.0: unexpected behaviour (bug?)
- Previous by thread: Re: what weren't structure/union/map made part of F77/90 ?
- Next by thread: Re: what weren't structure/union/map made part of F77/90 ?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
