RE: [photran] running photran

[Doug Schaefer <DSchaefer@xxxxxxx>]

Super, thanks Craig. I found a draft of the 2003 spec out on the Net. I'm
used to reading specs and this one is an easier read than the C++ spec, but
a book would probably be a better place start :).

Thanks,
Doug

> -----Original Message-----
> From: photran-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:photran-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On
> Behalf Of Craig Rasmussen
> Sent: Monday, October 31, 2005 11:02 AM
> To: Photran Information
> Subject: Re: [photran] running photran
> 
> 
> On Oct 31, 2005, at 7:58 AM, Doug Schaefer wrote:
> 
> > So can someone enlighten me on the g95 versus gfortran story. I
> > read the
> > something on the gcc site that slammed g95. But I read somewhere
> > else that
> > g95 was more advanced in their development.
> >
> > After all the talk at the CDT summit about Fortran. I figured that
> > I should
> > probably play around with it and learn Fortran. Which path should I
> > follow?
> >
> 
> Buy "Fortran 95/2003 Explained" by Metcalf, Reid, and Cohen and
> peruse it.
> 
> As I understand it (I've forgotten the details) there was a
> disagreement among
> the g95 committers and gfortran split off leaving one (I think)
> person still working on
> g95.  gfortran is officially blessed by GNU and will be included in
> future releases
> of gcc.
> 
> However, g95 is apparently better at compiling real code.  We are
> using (and
> adding F2003 features) to gfortran.
> 
> You might want to look at:
> 
> 1. Arrays (first class objects in Fortran).
> 2. Modules (compare with C++ namespaces).
> 3. Derived types (compare with C structs).
> 4. C interop (in F2003 for interoperability with C).
> 
> Cheers,
> Craig
> 
> _______________________________________________
> photran mailing list
> photran@xxxxxxxxxxx
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/photran