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

Duane Bozarth wrote: 
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've never heard that MS refused to license to Intel. My understanding was that the licensing would have been identical to that offered to Lahey and Salford and others and Intel chose not to go that route (cost?, lesser integration than CVF provided). Is that not true?



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.



--

Gary Scott
mailto:garyscott@xxxxxxx

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.


If you want to do the impossible, don't hire an expert because he knows it can't be done.

-- Henry Ford
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Compaq Visual Fortran discontinued: upgrade to Intel Visual Fortran?
    ... > Thank you very much, everybody, for your responses so far. ... > Does windows-specific code compile (i.e., ... > are there similar ones in IVF?) ... w/ the compiler as was done w/ CVF. ...
    (comp.lang.fortran)
  • Re: Compaq Visual Fortran discontinued: upgrade to Intel Visual Fortran?
    ... Thank you very much, everybody, for your responses so far. ... Is the integrated editor/debugger environment of IVF similar/different ... that for my present needs CVF is perfectly okay. ... > an upgrade to Intel Visual Fortran 9.0. ...
    (comp.lang.fortran)
  • Re: Another PL/I cant
    ... > One of the VAX extensions that predates the current standard by many years ... I did have a standard conforming way to write something like ... CVF fails to compile it. ...
    (comp.lang.fortran)
  • Re: COM/Automation problem with CVF 6.x
    ... The call to the function DlgSetCtrlEventHandler - the optional 5th argument ... There are other compile and link errors under VS2003 + IVF that I don't have ... use the Intel community forum where CVF and IVF questions can be raised. ... shipped in Compaq Visual Fortran distributive (SAMPLES directory) stays ...
    (comp.lang.fortran)
  • Re: Two problems
    ... I have a fortran CVF code that I run on two Intel machines on windows ... platform - one a 32 bit and other a 64 bit workstation. ... Try compiling with all of the run-time error checking you can find ... enabled and turn on all of the compile time warnings you can. ...
    (comp.lang.fortran)