| T.R | Title | User | Personal
Name | Date | Lines |
|---|
| 105.1 | | PASTIS::MONAHAN | | Mon Sep 22 1986 07:19 | 9 |
| 1) The leftmost subscript varies most rapidly. This would mean that
xarray(2) would occupy the same storage as yarray(2,1).
2) Some species of Fortran permit integer variables to be used with
logical operators, to perform a bitwise operation. The .OR. operation
will produce a result that has a bit set in any position that either
operand had a bit set. The .NOT. 7 gives an integer that has all
bits except the low order 3 set. The .AND. operation masks out these
bits.
|
| 105.2 | Bitwise operations in Pascal | MINAR::BISHOP | | Mon Sep 22 1986 11:50 | 5 |
| To get logical operations on whole longwords using VAX Pascal,
use the UAND, UOR, UXOR and UNOT predeclared functions. See
page 11-7 of "Programming in VAX Pascal".
-John Bishop
|
| 105.3 | | CHOVAX::YOUNG | I think we're all bozos on this BUS. | Mon Sep 22 1986 13:27 | 5 |
| Why would you want to slow down a good FORTRAN program by converting
it into Pascal anyway?
;^) Barry
|
| 105.4 | Improve your code; drop the card deck | TLE::AMARTIN | Alan H. Martin | Tue Sep 23 1986 16:59 | 4 |
| Re .3:
The only good Fortran program is a dead Fortran program.
/AHM
|
| 105.5 | FORTRAN will never die | QUARK::LIONEL | Reality is frequently inaccurate | Tue Sep 23 1986 22:59 | 10 |
| Re .4:
I have long since forgotten who said this, but it doesn't matter.
The quote is:
"I don't know what the programming language of the year 2000
will look like, but I know it will be called FORTRAN."
Steve
|
| 105.6 | S. Cray | CLT::GILBERT | eager like a child | Wed Sep 24 1986 00:25 | 0 |
| 105.7 | He may have been mistaken... | CIM::JONAN | We should've stopped at fire... | Wed Sep 24 1986 10:49 | 5 |
| Hmmmmm. Interesting seein' how the CRAY-2 will be running some
sort of version of UNIX and have some extended version of C for
the primary language.
/Jon
|
| 105.8 | | IPG::HAXBY | John Haxby -- Definitively Wrong | Fri Dec 05 1986 13:33 | 5 |
| Re .1, .2: The order Fortran stores its array elements is, I think,
implementation dependent. Whoever thought up equivalence should
be shot, at dawn, if not sooner.
jch
|
| 105.9 | To implement is human, to standardize is divine | NOBUGS::AMARTIN | Alan H. Martin | Fri Dec 05 1986 13:59 | 11 |
| Re .8:
> Re .1, .2: The order Fortran stores its array elements is, I think,
> implementation dependent. Whoever thought up equivalence should
> be shot, at dawn, if not sooner.
Only in the sense that non-standard-conforming implementations might be
stupid enough to implement arrays with row-major mapping, or subscripts
running in the wrong direction. All ANSI standard Fortran implementations
use the same storage order, since the standard requires it.
/AHM
|
| 105.10 | | NOGOV::HAXBY | John Haxby -- Definitively Wrong | Wed Jan 07 1987 09:16 | 4 |
| I lost interest in Fortran before the ANSI standard got established
... I stand corrected.
jch
|