Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!pyrdc!pyrnj!rutgers!cmcl2!lanl!jlg
From: jlg@lanl.gov (Jim Giles)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.fortran
Subject: Re: Fortran versus C for numerical analysis
Message-ID: <3630@lanl.gov>
Date: 15 Sep 88 17:17:47 GMT
References: <13567@mimsy.UUCP>
Organization: Los Alamos National Laboratory
Lines: 23

From article <13567@mimsy.UUCP>, by chris@mimsy.UUCP (Chris Torek):
> 
> You have just described C declarations.

No, I didn't.  I said that the declaration for an array should look 
(and mean) something different than the declaration of a pointer.
In C, there are indeed two different syntaxes - they just both mean
the _same_ thing.  I can't declare an array in C without getting
one or more pointers declared into the bargain.  I want a language
that gives _me_ the choice.  C doesn't do it!  Most of the pointer
proposals for Fortran do!  C _can't_ do it without making changes which
aren't backward compatible.  _All_ the Fortran pointer proposals
I've seen _are_ backward compatible.  (The Cray Fortran compiler has
had pointers for years.  Everything you can do with C pointers you can
do with Fortran pointers.  Arrays can be dynamically allocated - but
the declaration and use of the arrays are identical with statically
allocated arrays except for the additional POINTER statement.  In C,
the declaration of a dynamically allocated (multi-D) array is completely
different from the declaration for a statically allocated one - the use
is different too if you follow most implementation proposals.)

J. Giles
Los Alamos