Re: Another Fortran forum (without the spam)?

On Apr 20, 8:32 pm, Terence <tbwri...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Apr 21, 12:29 am, Arjan <arjan.van.d...@xxxxxxx> wrote:


Spam does be an issue.
Ignoring its impact is ignoring the demise of CLF.
Which is a pity.


Hurrah for logic!

This is funny for me. I tend to think along this line:

if the demise of CLF is real and such demise is somehow produced by
the spam then CLF was meant to demise independently of spam.

but maybe I have the wrong logic...


[snip again]