Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!swrinde!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!ames!skipper!altair!maine From: maine@altair.dfrf.nasa.gov (Richard Maine) Newsgroups: comp.lang.fortran Subject: Re: F90 compiler from NAG Message-ID: Date: 25 Jun 91 17:18:55 GMT References: <1991Jun21.214012.5405@alchemy.chem.utoronto.ca> Sender: news@skipper.dfrf.nasa.gov Organization: NASA Dryden, Edwards, Cal. Lines: 39 In-reply-to: khb@chiba.Eng.Sun.COM's message of 24 Jun 91 14:24:26 GMT On 24 Jun 91 14:24:26 GMT, khb@chiba.Eng.Sun.COM (Keith Bierman fpgroup) said: Keith> I suspect that if it is sucessful, it will get turned into a "normal" Keith> compiler. In the meantime it should give folks a chance to learn the Keith> new features of the language. Agreed. That's what you should expect out of a first release of a "processor" (be it a compiler, translator, or whatever) for a new language. I want something that works for now so I can do more code development and make sure that my understanding of the language agrees with that of a compiler. It would be nice if it was within a factor of 2 or 3 in speed to current f77 code, but I'll survive if it isn't. Anyone who really expects a first compiler for a new language to emerge full-blown with optimizations that illustrate its clear superiority over all other languages must be on some really strange drugs. Let us see something that works and works correctly before getting excited about optimization issues. It has yet to be demonstrated to me whether the NAG "compiler" works correctly to my satisfaction or not. I certainly plan to check it out though. On the compiler vs. translator question: I've long agreed with the position that C bears more relationship to a somewhat portable form of assembly language with fancy macros than it does to a higher level language like Fortran, which is more suitable to human consumption. So why make a big deal about the distinction of a "compiler" that puts out the C assembly language instead of those other machine-dependent things. :-) (Please note the smiley face. As with most attempts at humor, some elements of "truth" lie embedded, but don't take the above paragraph too seriously. Though I'm more at home with Fortran, I do use C and other languages when they seem more appropriate, which they sometimes do. On my PC clone at home, I probably use Turbo Pascal more than all the rest of the languages combined). -- -- Richard Maine maine@altair.dfrf.nasa.gov