Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!rochester!cornell!batcomputer!garry
From: garry@batcomputer.tn.cornell.edu (Garry Wiegand)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.fortran
Subject: Fortran identifiers around the world
Message-ID: <1614@batcomputer.tn.cornell.edu>
Date: Mon, 1-Dec-86 21:39:22 EST
Article-I.D.: batcompu.1614
Posted: Mon Dec  1 21:39:22 1986
Date-Received: Tue, 2-Dec-86 04:32:03 EST
Reply-To: garry%cadif-oak@cu-arpa.cs.cornell.edu
Distribution: world
Organization: Cornell Engineering && Flying Moose Graphics
Lines: 28

Hi -

I'm trying to come up with a Fortran binding for a large subroutine
library we've written in C. Converting the arguments properly has been
solved; now we're just worrying about what the "standard" fortran
routine *names* should look like. Our standard C routine names are a 
mile long (but very descriptive :-) and contain lots of _'s.

What I'm wondering is whether it's worth *attempting* to make our names
acceptable to the "Fortran-77" compilers of the world, or whether I
should just give up and always insist on a preprocessing step.

What I know so far:
                                 identifier   dollar signs,
                                   length     underscores OK

    Vax/VMS                 --       31          yes    
    BSD Unix                --       16          no     
    IBM (not sure of this)  --        6          no     
    SVS (68000)             --       31          no     


And what I'm specifically wondering is: is there any consensus on name
length? Is there any consensus on underscores? I'm soliciting votes...

Thanks much. If there's interest I'll post the results.

garry wiegand   (garry%cadif-oak@cu-arpa.cs.cornell.edu)