Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!unmvax!pprg.unm.edu!hc!lanl!jlg
From: jlg@lanl.gov (Jim Giles)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: fortran to C converter
Message-ID: <12716@lanl.gov>
Date: 26 Apr 89 19:16:20 GMT
References: <9244@alice.UUCP>
Organization: Los Alamos National Laboratory
Lines: 23

From article <9244@alice.UUCP>, by dmr@alice.UUCP:
> Actually, with Cray's C, everything but chars is 64 bits.  Giles may
> have confused C with Fortran.  The CFT compiler needs an option to make
> doubleprecision 64 rather than 128 bits, but the C compilers don't,
> and don't seem to have the opposite option.

As I pointed out in my most recent submission on this thread.  As I also
pointed out, the actual C implementation is no better than the one I
originally described.  Single and double should be two _different_
types and Complex should (at least by default) be single.

> Speaking of doubleprecision, the next topic of discussion is why C
> believes in whitespace.

Yes. For example, why does C treat a carriage return as whitespace?
Nobody programs like that.  Most people put _one_ statement per line,
so the use of _both_ semicolon and carriage return as statement terminators
seems redundant.  Why does C choose to ignore the "wrong" one?

> 				Dennis Ritchie

And, of course, THANKS.  Now I can claim to have been actually flamed by
Dennis Ritchie HIMSELF on _two_ occasions!  8-)