Fortran Features
- From: "Joe" <jkrahn@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 7 Feb 2006 19:29:10 -0800
A lot of people have ideas for Fortran features, judging by the
numerous vendor extensions, most of which never become part of the
standard. I assume that some reluctance to add features is to avoid
feature bloat. In any case, here are a few I would like.
Fortran has moved towards making user functions and subroutines have
more features of interinsic procedures. Along those lines, why not make
the CALL keyword optional for any subroutine that has been prototyped
with an INTERFACE?
How about supporting local-scope variables, like inside of DO/IF/etc.
blocks?
Text named line labels would be nice, even though modern code minimizes
the use of line labels.
It would be nice to allow mixing of functions and subroutines in the
same generic type name. This is more useful with derived types, where
the unique areument type keeps things distinct.
Some user-defined type functions would be a lot easier to implement
with user-defined type coersion rules. For example, ISO_VARYING_STRING
implementations, would be much simpler for mixing CHAR and
VARYING_STRING procedures if you could define rules for converting
arguments among those types.
Lastly, does it help to post such ideas to comp.lang.fortran, or does
one need to be on a Fortran committee to have any influence on the
language?
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Fortran Features
- From: robin
- Re: Fortran Features
- From: John Harper
- Re: Fortran Features
- From: David Flower
- Re: Fortran Features
- From: Richard Maine
- Re: Fortran Features
- From: Richard Maine
- Re: Fortran Features
- From: glen herrmannsfeldt
- Re: Fortran Features
- From: James Van Buskirk
- Re: Fortran Features
- From: James Giles
- Re: Fortran Features
- Prev by Date: Re: Code works with real but does not with double precision. Why??
- Next by Date: Re: Fortran Features
- Previous by thread: Code works with real but does not with double precision. Why??
- Next by thread: Re: Fortran Features
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
|