Path: utzoo!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!magnus.ircc.ohio-state.edu!csn!ncar!unmvax!uokmax!servalan!epmooch!ben From: ben@epmooch.UUCP (Rev. Ben A. Mesander) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.programmer Subject: Re: FORTRAN on the Amiga Message-ID: Date: 3 Mar 91 21:24:42 GMT References: <2412@ria.ccs.uwo.ca> <1991Mar4.191533.3300@jato.jpl.nasa.gov> Lines: 26 >In article <1991Mar4.191533.3300@jato.jpl.nasa.gov> jdickson@jato.jpl.nasa.gov (Jeff Dickson) writes: >>me: [..] >>For example, FORTRAN >>subprogram arguments are passed by reference, rather than by value. > > ...And pointers to objects in 'C'. How are they passed? This is true. But how many C programs do you see that pass only pointers to objects around? FORTRAN tends to be a bit faster also when you are dealing with things like the COMPLEX datatype. Oh, and yes, you can define C macros to handle similar things. Your assertation that it is entirely coding style *is* incorrect, however. It depends on the machine architecture quite a bit. FORTRAN on a Prime Mini, with an assembler instruction set designed for FORTRAN (In large part, the OS is written in FORTRAN), will perform well. C code on that machine is both larger and slower. Pointers to chars and pointers to ints are different lengths, it is impossible to point to 'byte' objects without trickery, and a segmented architecture make it a pretty "C-hostile" environment. None of this has much to do with the Amiga, however. > Jeff -- ben@epmooch.UUCP ben%servalan.UUCP@uokmax.ecn.uoknor.edu {chinet,uokmax}!servalan!epmooch!ben (Ben Mesander)