Re: Fortran 77 parser
- From: Walter Spector <w6ws_xthisoutx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 04 Apr 2008 22:14:23 -0700
James Giles wrote:
...). I've never even heard of compilers that
support just DOUBLE as a keyword, so I've never accomotated it.
As I describe above, I *could* do so. I just never thought of it.
It is yet another old CDC extension. Early Cray compilers (CFT and
first couple versions of CFT77) also supported it. What was nasty was
getting a VAX code that had DOUBLE COMPLEX in it. Often times you'd
get a clean compile, but the code would be completely wrong! A lot of
us complained to the compiler group, and eventually they saw the light
and replaced the CDCism with the VAXism.
So old extensions do die off, eventually.
W.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Fortran 77 parser
- From: James Giles
- Re: Fortran 77 parser
- From: Richard Maine
- Re: Fortran 77 parser
- References:
- Re: Fortran 77 parser
- From: Jon Harrop
- Re: Fortran 77 parser
- From: Tobias Burnus
- Re: Fortran 77 parser
- From: Jon Harrop
- Re: Fortran 77 parser
- From: glen herrmannsfeldt
- Re: Fortran 77 parser
- From: James Giles
- Re: Fortran 77 parser
- From: Richard Maine
- Re: Fortran 77 parser
- From: James Giles
- Re: Fortran 77 parser
- From: *** Hendrickson
- Re: Fortran 77 parser
- From: James Giles
- Re: Fortran 77 parser
- Prev by Date: Re: Assumed-shape arrays and dummy procedures
- Next by Date: Re: glibc detected *** ./run.out: munmap_chunk(): invalid pointer:
- Previous by thread: Re: Fortran 77 parser
- Next by thread: Re: Fortran 77 parser
- Index(es):