Re: Compaq Visual Fortran discontinued: upgrade to Intel Visual Fortran?

NN wrote:
>
> Thank you very much, everybody, for your responses so far. While
> interesting, I regret to say that none of the responses so far has been very
> helpful for my decision and I'm sure that's entirely my fault for not being
> specific enough. Let me try again.
> (1) More speed is nice, but it's not really an issue since I learned a
> long time ago that this can easily become a game of diminishing returns.
> I'll gladly sacrifice a factor of 2 in speed if I can have code that's easy
> to debug and maintain.
> (2) Is the integrated editor/debugger environment of IVF similar/different
> from CVF? If different, what are the differences?
> (3) Does windows-specific code compile (i.e., code that uses graphics
> routines)? Are there any problems linking the CVF-specific libraries? (Or
> are there similar ones in IVF?)
> (4) Are there other issues with code portability?

I'd think the thing to do would be to download the trial version and
play w/ it some. My understanding is that you have to have the MS
Visual Studio in addition to the Intel-supplied compiler/components to
get the IDE as MS chose to not license it to Intel for the integration
w/ the compiler as was done w/ CVF.

> I should say, that for my present needs CVF is perfectly okay. My question
> therefore is: Should I shell out $650 now for an upgrade to IVF, to preserve
> the option of further upgrades down the road, or should I simply stick with
> CVF for now and perhaps at some later stage, if the need arises, buy a full
> version of IVF.
....

I'd say only you can answer the last question, but unless you're working
on a commercial product it would seem quite unneeded.
.

Relevant Pages