Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!rutgers!sri-spam!ames!elroy!cit-vax!oberon!skat.usc.edu!blarson
From: blarson@skat.usc.edu (Bob Larson)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: Allocating two dimensional arrays
Message-ID: <6392@oberon.USC.EDU>
Date: 22 Jan 88 06:19:51 GMT
References: <419@nikhefh.hep.nl> <10278@mimsy.UUCP> <3590@sdcc6.ucsd.EDU>
Sender: nobody@oberon.USC.EDU
Reply-To: blarson@skat.usc.edu (Bob Larson)
Organization: USC AIS, Los Angeles
Lines: 28

In article <3590@sdcc6.ucsd.EDU> ix426@sdcc6.ucsd.edu.UUCP (tom stockfish) writes:
>4. ... so it can be sent to a fortran routine ...

>5.  Prove that #4 cannot be done portably if the type of the matrix
>    is not specified at compile time.

How many proofs do you want?

A.  I don't have fortran on my  qt+, so calling fortran is unportable.

(dito A for upteen machines where fortran is either unavailable or
prohibitavly expensive.)

B.  Fortran calling in Prime C is completly different that that in
4.2 BSD C.

(Dito B for upteen trillion combiniations of operating systems and
compilers.)

Why would I want to mess things up with a matrix in my proof?

[Repeat after me: all the world is not a vax 780 running 4.1c BSD with
no modifacations.]
--
Bob Larson	Arpa: Blarson@Ecla.Usc.Edu	blarson@skat.usc.edu
Uucp: {sdcrdcf,cit-vax}!oberon!skat!blarson
Prime mailing list:	info-prime-request%fns1@ecla.usc.edu
			oberon!fns1!info-prime-request