Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!swrinde!cs.utexas.edu!sun-barr!apple!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: 1 Mar 91 12:46:40 GMT References: Lines: 32 >In article philw@pharma.UUCP (Philip Michael Williams) writes: [...] > Perhaps we should stop this shift to 'C', >the trendy language, for all our programming and us FORTRAN for the tasking >stuff. Do you mean that compiled fortran is faster than fortran converted to C, and then compiled? This doesn't surprise me at all. As for whether compiled FORTRAN is faster/slower than compiled C, this is generally dependent on the architecture of the machine, and how good the authors of the compiler were. I can *write* most C programs faster than equivalent FORTRAN programs, although I've spent a lot more time coding in FORTRAN than C. >Are there other Amiga FORTRAN compilers other than Absofts ? On ab20.larc.nasa.gov, there is a PD F77 compiler called BCF77. I ftp'd it, and tried to compile a program posted on alt.folklore.computers that was a extrememly contorted and complex fortran program. It compiled it and executed it correctly, which surprised me. There is little English documentation, but F77 is F77 the world round... > Phil Williams cbmuk!cbmuka!pharma!philw -- ben@epmooch.UUCP ben%servalan.UUCP@uokmax.ecn.uoknor.edu {chinet,uokmax}!servalan!epmooch!ben (Ben Mesander) War in gulf: newpath 288 396 216 0 360 arc 288 612 moveto 288 180 lineto 288 396 moveto 136 244 lineto 288 396 moveto 440 244 lineto 36 setlinewidth stroke showpage