Re: Praise for Gfortran (finally)
- From: Beliavsky <beliavsky@xxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2008 10:20:04 -0700 (PDT)
On Sep 18, 3:56 am, paul.richard.tho...@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
Al and Damian,
Many thanks for the praise - every little bit helps:-)
Over the last few years I have developed a 30,000 line Fortran-95
engineering application using simultaneously several compilers (XLF,
LF95, G95, and IVF). During that time I toyed with Gfortran and put
up with the 2 steps forward, 1 step back of each binary build.
We are sharply aware of this problem. It has come about largely
because of the inadequacy, in the past, of our testsuite. Not having
a take-the-standard-and-write-a-testsuite yardstick to go by, ours has
grown as we have fixed bugs and regressions.
They do exist, for example http://www.fortran.com/f95ts.html . How
much do they cost? I would donate a few hundred dollars toward buying
one, if the Gfortran started a collection.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Praise for Gfortran (finally)
- From: Tobias Burnus
- Re: Praise for Gfortran (finally)
- References:
- Praise for Gfortran (finally)
- From: Al Greynolds
- Re: Praise for Gfortran (finally)
- From: Damian
- Re: Praise for Gfortran (finally)
- From: paul . richard . thomas
- Praise for Gfortran (finally)
- Prev by Date: Re: Scope of implicit none
- Next by Date: Re: Write statement in subroutine affecting output of return values
- Previous by thread: Re: Praise for Gfortran (finally)
- Next by thread: Re: Praise for Gfortran (finally)
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|